Pearce & Williams v. Borg Chewing-Gum Co.

36 S.E. 457, 111 Ga. 847, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 815
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided June 8, 1900·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Simmons, C. J.

Where the purchaser of goods seeks to avoid the contract of purchase on the ground of fraud, he must, upon the discovery of the facts constituting the fraud, upon his first opportunity to do so, announce his purpose to rescind. If he remain silent and retain possession of the goods received under the contract, without complaint, until long after the discovery of the facts, he will be held to have waived the objection and will be bound by the contract as though there had been no fraud. Smith v. Esley Organ Co., 100 Ga. 628, and cases cited. This is especially true where the purchaser endeavors to rescind the contract in part only. Maynard v. Render, 95 Ga. 652.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring, except Fish, J., absent.

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

Pearce & Williams v. Borg Chewing-Gum Co., 36 S.E. 457, 111 Ga. 847, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 815 (Ga. 1900).

36 S.E. 457 (Pearce & Williams v. Borg Chewing-Gum Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Webb v. City of Atlanta
4 S.E.2d 154 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
Gibson v. Alford
132 S.E. 442 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1926)
Joiner v. Southern Land Sales Corp.
124 S.E. 518 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1924)
Warner v. Hill
112 S.E. 478 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1922)
Ruff v. Copeland
72 S.E. 506 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1911)
Tuttle v. Stovall
67 S.E. 806 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1910)
Board of Education v. Day
57 S.E. 359 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1907)