Polk v. Benton's Sons

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Polk v. Benton's Sons

128 S.E. 923, 34 Ga. App. 187, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 136

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 14, 1925

Docket16456

StatusPublished

This text of 128 S.E. 923 (Polk v. Benton's Sons) 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

Polk v. Benton's Sons, 128 S.E. 923, 34 Ga. App. 187, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 136 (Ga. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodworti-i, J.

This -was a suit against a landlord for goods furnished his tenant by third persons. The evidence for the plaintiff was sufficient to authorize the jury to reach the conclusion that the goods were furnished the tenant solely on the credit of the defendant. The defendant denied that he ever authorized the plaintiff to charge any of the goods to him, or that he was liable on the account for any amount except $18.20 for four sacks of guano. This amount was paid into court. The jury, who are the arbiters in all questions of fact, believed the evidence of the plaintiff and returned a verdict for the amount of principal sued for, less $18.20 which had been paid into court. Under the principle announced in Trapnell v. Bird, 21 Ga. App. 21 (2) (93 S. E. 498), and Cordray v. James, 19 Ga. App. 156 (91 S. E. 239), the verdict was authorized, and there is no merit in any of the grounds of the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and Lulce, J., concur.

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

Bloodworti-i, J.

This -was a suit against a landlord for goods furnished his tenant by third persons. The evidence for the plaintiff was sufficient to authorize the jury to reach the conclusion that the goods were furnished the tenant solely on the credit of the defendant. The defendant denied that he ever authorized the plaintiff to charge any of the goods to him, or that he was liable on the account for any amount except $18.20 for four sacks of guano. This amount was paid into court. The jury, who are the arbiters in all questions of fact, believed the evidence of the plaintiff and returned a verdict for the amount of principal sued for, less $18.20 which had been paid into court. Under the principle announced in Trapnell v. Bird, 21 Ga. App. 21 (2) (93 S. E. 498), and Cordray v. James, 19 Ga. App. 156 (91 S. E. 239), the verdict was authorized, and there is no merit in any of the grounds of the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and Lulce, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 S.E. 923, 34 Ga. App. 187, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 136, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/polk-v-bentons-sons-gactapp-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack