Norton v. Paragon Oil Can Co.

30 S.E. 437, 105 Ga. 466, 1898 Ga. LEXIS 548
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided March 24, 1898·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Little, J.

This court, at the March term, 1896 (98 Ga. 468), decided that, under the law and the facts of this case as they then appeared, both the plaintiff in error and his late partner were liable to the de5 [467]*467fendant in error upon the account in question. At the trial now under review, no material error, if any at all, was committed; and the facts by which the ease is controlled being substantially the same, there was no error in directing a verdict in accordance with the previous adjudication of this court.

Argued February 22, Decided March 24, 1898. Complaint on note. Before Judge Harris. City court of Floyd county. December term, 1896. Fouche & Fouche, for plaintiff in error. Rowell & Rowell, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

All concurring, except Cobb, J., absent.

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

Norton v. Paragon Oil Can Co., 30 S.E. 437, 105 Ga. 466, 1898 Ga. LEXIS 548 (Ga. 1898).

30 S.E. 437 (Norton v. Paragon Oil Can Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lumbermen's Underwriting Alliance v. First National Bank & Trust Co.
110 S.E.2d 782 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1959)
Blackwell v. Southland Butane Gas Co.
97 S.E.2d 191 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1957)
Lankford v. Tanner
52 S.E.2d 315 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1949)
Shirling v. Hester
40 S.E.2d 743 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1946)
Rivers v. Brown
36 S.E.2d 429 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1945)