Martin v. Moore

Supreme Court of Georgia

Martin v. Moore

63 Ga. 531

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 15, 1879

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 63 Ga. 531 (Martin v. Moore) 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

Martin v. Moore, 63 Ga. 531 (Ga. 1879).

Pincite

Opinion

Bleckley, Justice.

The plaintiff in error urged fraud, and insisted that the article delivered was different from the one bargained for. He cited 1 Smith’s L. C., 220 ; Code, §2751; 52. Ga., 191; and Allen vs. Young, last term. The defendant in error cited 57 Ga., 350 ; 60 lb., 288, 383. The view which the court took of the case will appear from reading the head-notes, these indicating the reasons for judgment as well as the points adjudged. It was not alleged that the fertilizer was not properly branded, and hence Kleckley vs. Leyden, this term, does not apply.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Bleckley, Justice.

The plaintiff in error urged fraud, and insisted that the article delivered was different from the one bargained for. He cited 1 Smith’s L. C., 220 ; Code, §2751; 52. Ga., 191; and Allen vs. Young, last term. The defendant in error cited 57 Ga., 350 ; 60 lb., 288, 383. The view which the court took of the case will appear from reading the head-notes, these indicating the reasons for judgment as well as the points adjudged. It was not alleged that the fertilizer was not properly branded, and hence Kleckley vs. Leyden, this term, does not apply.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 Ga. 531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-moore-ga-1879.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack