Interstate Lumber Co. v. Bennett

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Interstate Lumber Co. v. Bennett

110 S.E. 500, 28 Ga. App. 179, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 367

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 10, 1922

Docket12311

StatusPublished

This text of 110 S.E. 500 (Interstate Lumber Co. v. Bennett) 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

Interstate Lumber Co. v. Bennett, 110 S.E. 500, 28 Ga. App. 179, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 367 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Stephens, J.

1. Where there is a contract between two parties, by the terms of which one party has agreed to pay the other party for the performance of certain services when performed, and, before the performance of such services by the latter party, the first party makes an advancement of money under the contract to the second party and takes as security therefor a chattel mortgage executed by the second party, the second party may in a defense to a foreclosure of such mortgage by the first party show that the advancement for which the mortgage has been given has been satisfied by the second party’s performance of the original contract, and may also in addition thereto recover against the first party any balance which may be due the second party by the first party under the contract. Such a defense is not a set-off, but is a plea of payment and recoupment, and may be made by the defendant in. a proceeding to foreclose the mortgage.

2. The counter-affidavit of the defendant, setting up such a defense, was good against demurrer, and as it was supported by the evidence, the trial judge did not err in overruling the demurrer or the motion to strike the counter-affidavit or in' overruling the plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Hill, J., concur.

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

Stephens, J.

1. Where there is a contract between two parties, by the terms of which one party has agreed to pay the other party for the performance of certain services when performed, and, before the performance of such services by the latter party, the first party makes an advancement of money under the contract to the second party and takes as security therefor a chattel mortgage executed by the second party, the second party may in a defense to a foreclosure of such mortgage by the first party show that the advancement for which the mortgage has been given has been satisfied by the second party’s performance of the original contract, and may also in addition thereto recover against the first party any balance which may be due the second party by the first party under the contract. Such a defense is not a set-off, but is a plea of payment and recoupment, and may be made by the defendant in. a proceeding to foreclose the mortgage.

2. The counter-affidavit of the defendant, setting up such a defense, was good against demurrer, and as it was supported by the evidence, the trial judge did not err in overruling the demurrer or the motion to strike the counter-affidavit or in' overruling the plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Hill, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

110 S.E. 500, 28 Ga. App. 179, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 367, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/interstate-lumber-co-v-bennett-gactapp-1922.