Hatcher Co. v. Foster

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hatcher Co. v. Foster

101 S.E. 299, 24 Ga. App. 430, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 705

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 19, 1919

Docket10356

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 101 S.E. 299 (Hatcher Co. v. Foster) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hatcher Co. v. Foster, 101 S.E. 299, 24 Ga. App. 430, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 705 (Ga. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

Smith, J.

In a statutory proceeding to condemn a vehicle illegally employed in the transportation of intoxicating liquors, where the owner of the vehicle had conditionally sold it, but, under the terms of a series of notes given in payment for the vehicle, title was in each note reserved in the vendor until full payment of the purchase-money should be made, the mere fact that none of the notes except the last one of the series had been attested as required by law or [431]*431recorded would not defeat the seller’s claim of title under his reservation. See Shrouder v. Sweat, 148 Ga. 378 (96 S. E. 881); Whites v. State, 23 Ga. App. 174 (98 S. E. 171); Armington v. State, ante, 75 (100 S. E. 15). Therefore the court (who was acting both as judge and jury) erred in holding that because of this omission none of the notes except the last one of the series constituted a lien on the vehicle.

Decided November 19, 1919.

Condemnation; from city court of Madison—Judge Anderson. January 22, 1919.

Williford & Lambert, for plaintiff in error. A. G. Foster, solicitor, contra.

2. There was no evidence produced on the trial tending to show that the vendor participated in the criminal enterprise or had any notice that the vehicle was to be used in the transportation of intoxicating liquor.

Judgment reversed.

Jenlcins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

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

Smith, J.

In a statutory proceeding to condemn a vehicle illegally employed in the transportation of intoxicating liquors, where the owner of the vehicle had conditionally sold it, but, under the terms of a series of notes given in payment for the vehicle, title was in each note reserved in the vendor until full payment of the purchase-money should be made, the mere fact that none of the notes except the last one of the series had been attested as required by law or [431]*431recorded would not defeat the seller’s claim of title under his reservation. See Shrouder v. Sweat, 148 Ga. 378 (96 S. E. 881); Whites v. State, 23 Ga. App. 174 (98 S. E. 171); Armington v. State, ante, 75 (100 S. E. 15). Therefore the court (who was acting both as judge and jury) erred in holding that because of this omission none of the notes except the last one of the series constituted a lien on the vehicle.

Decided November 19, 1919.

Condemnation; from city court of Madison—Judge Anderson. January 22, 1919.

Williford & Lambert, for plaintiff in error. A. G. Foster, solicitor, contra.

2. There was no evidence produced on the trial tending to show that the vendor participated in the criminal enterprise or had any notice that the vehicle was to be used in the transportation of intoxicating liquor.

Judgment reversed.

Jenlcins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 S.E. 299, 24 Ga. App. 430, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 705, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hatcher-co-v-foster-gactapp-1919.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack