Garmany v. Rust

35 Ga. 108
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedDecember 15, 1866
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 35 Ga. 108 (Garmany v. Rust) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Garmany v. Rust, 35 Ga. 108 (Ga. 1866).

Opinion

Walker, J.

[1.] We reverse the judgment in this case, under the facts admitted, upon the ground that Rust is entitled to collect but twenty-five cents per bale for the first month, and twelVe and a half cents for each subsequent month, with interest added on the amount due at the end of each year, np to the time the money was tendered. Judge Lumpkin and I place our decision upon the sixth “ admission by plaintiff,” (a very curious admission,” I must say, to come from th % plaintiff) “ 6th. That it has been the custom from time immemorial for warehousemen to change their rates of storage according to the amount of labor, care and expense necessary in protecting property stored; but no change m charges on cotton already stored.” By the “ 2d admission made by defendant,” the price of storage was, as above stated — 25 cents the first month, and 12-J the second. Judge Harris thinks that the customary rates, at the time of storage became a part of the contract, and could not be changed without the consent of the plaintiff, either express or implied. In this case the result is the same; and we unanimously reverse the judgment of the Court below.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cravey v. Druggists Co-Operative Ice-Cream Co.
19 S.E.2d 845 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1942)
Bush v. Cowart & Dancer
117 S.E. 104 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 Ga. 108, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garmany-v-rust-ga-1866.