Lee Bros. v. Bewley-Darst Coal Co.

97 S.E. 99, 22 Ga. App. 693, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 689
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedOctober 16, 1918
Docket9594
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 97 S.E. 99 (Lee Bros. v. Bewley-Darst Coal 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
Lee Bros. v. Bewley-Darst Coal Co., 97 S.E. 99, 22 Ga. App. 693, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 689 (Ga. Ct. App. 1918).

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. Where an executory contract for the sale of goods provides for the- delivery of the goods on order during a certain period, time is of the essence of the contract, and a failure to order delivery during -that period, terminates the right to order shipment of the goods. Bearden Mercantile Co. v. Madison Oil Co., 128 Ga. 605. (58 S. E. 200); Caddick Milling Co. v. Moultrie Grocery Co., 22 Ga. App. 524 (96 S. E. 583). See Gude v. Bailey Co., 4 Ga. App. 226 (61 S. E. 135).

2. The evidence demanded a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. It was not error, for any reason assigned, to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, O. J., and Jenkins, J.-, concur.

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

Related

Helmer v. Wilson & Co.
123 S.E. 901 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)
Ladd Lime & Stone Co. v. MacDougald Construction Co.
114 S.E. 75 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
97 S.E. 99, 22 Ga. App. 693, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 689, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lee-bros-v-bewley-darst-coal-co-gactapp-1918.