Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Howe v. Bernheim Distilling Co.

Howe v. Bernheim Distilling Co.

70 S.E. 176, 8 Ga. App. 771, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 142
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 15, 1911
Docket2530
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 70 S.E. 176 (Howe v. Bernheim Distilling Co.) 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
Howe v. Bernheim Distilling Co., 70 S.E. 176, 8 Ga. App. 771, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 142 (Ga. Ct. App. 1911).

Opinion

Russell, J.

The court did not err in striking the plea, because the action was proceeding ex contractu, and the defendant attempted to set off a. matter ex delicto and to obtain a judgment against the plaintiff. The [772]*772decision of the case is controlled by the ruling in Hecht v. Snook, 114 Ga. 921 (41 S. E. 74). Judgment affirmed.

Decided February 15, 1911. . Complaint; from city court of Americus — Judge Crisp. February 4, 1910. o Shipp & 'Sheppard, for plaintiff in error. Allen Fort & Son, contra.

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

Related

Janes v. City of Cedartown
80 S.E. 339 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1913)
Jones v. George S. Riley Jr. Co.
80 S.E. 341 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
70 S.E. 176, 8 Ga. App. 771, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 142, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howe-v-bernheim-distilling-co-gactapp-1911.