Mutual Fertilizer Co. v. White & Son

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Mutual Fertilizer Co. v. White & Son

106 S.E. 19, 26 Ga. App. 134, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 25

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 20, 1921

Docket11567

StatusPublished

This text of 106 S.E. 19 (Mutual Fertilizer Co. v. White & Son) 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

Mutual Fertilizer Co. v. White & Son, 106 S.E. 19, 26 Ga. App. 134, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 25 (Ga. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

Stephens, J.

A bond executed by the claimant in a claim case, conditioned to pay to the plaintiff in fi. fa. all damages which the latter “may sustain . . in case it should appear that said claim was made for the purpose of delay only,” substantially complies with the Civil Code (1910), § 5158, which provides that the bond required of the claimant shall be “conditioned to pay the plaintiff all damages which the jury on the trial of the right of property may assess against him in case it should appear that said claim was made for the purpose of delay only.” Civil Code (1910), §4(6). Whatever damages a jury may in such a case “ assess ” will, in contemplation of law, be such damages as the plaintiff in fi. fa. has “ sustained,” and therefore are recoverable under the bond. See, in this connection, Civil Code (1910), §§ 5169, 5173;, 5 Cyc. 751.

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.

A bond executed by the claimant in a claim case, conditioned to pay to the plaintiff in fi. fa. all damages which the latter “may sustain . . in case it should appear that said claim was made for the purpose of delay only,” substantially complies with the Civil Code (1910), § 5158, which provides that the bond required of the claimant shall be “conditioned to pay the plaintiff all damages which the jury on the trial of the right of property may assess against him in case it should appear that said claim was made for the purpose of delay only.” Civil Code (1910), §4(6). Whatever damages a jury may in such a case “ assess ” will, in contemplation of law, be such damages as the plaintiff in fi. fa. has “ sustained,” and therefore are recoverable under the bond. See, in this connection, Civil Code (1910), §§ 5169, 5173;, 5 Cyc. 751.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

106 S.E. 19, 26 Ga. App. 134, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 25, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mutual-fertilizer-co-v-white-son-gactapp-1921.