Port Wentworth Lumber Co. v. McLean

97 S.E. 194, 22 Ga. App. 737, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 725
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedOctober 22, 1918
Docket9636
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 97 S.E. 194 (Port Wentworth Lumber Co. v. McLean) 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
Port Wentworth Lumber Co. v. McLean, 97 S.E. 194, 22 Ga. App. 737, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 725 (Ga. Ct. App. 1918).

Opinion

Bloodworth,. J.

The demurrer to the petition was properly overruled. “The defense of statute of frauds can be raised by demurrer to the petition only when the facts alleged in the. petition affirmatively show that the contract is oral and that there has not been suchiperformanee as to raise an exception.” . Marks v. Talmadge, 8 Ga. App. 557 (69 S. E. 1131); Kinney v. Kinney, 20 Ga. App. 816 (93 S. E. 496).

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, P. J., and. Harwell, J., concur. The petition alleges that the Port Wentworth Lumber Company is indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of $125' on an account, a copy of which is attached to. the petition. The account consists of two items, dated November 28, 1916, as follows: “2 timber cars complete, $100; 125 feet of steel loading chain, $25.” The demurrer was on the following grounds: “ (1) The petition sets forth no cause of action and is insufficient in law. (2) The petition fails to show when, where, or through whom the alleged account was contracted on the part of the defendant. (3) The petition fails to show the terms or conditions of the alleged contract of sale, and fails to show when the alleged indebtedness was to be paid. (4) The petition fails to show whether the alleged sale was made orally or in writing.” (5) The petition shows no writing signed by or in behalf of the defendant, and, being an account for the sale of goods and merchandise to the amount of more than $50, the sale is unenforceable under 'the statute of frauds, there being no allegation that the defendant accepted and actually received the goods or a part thereof,'or gave something to bind the bargain or in part payment. Hitch & Denmark, for plaintiff in error. Seabroolc & Kennedy, contra.

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

Related

North v. North
1 S.E.2d 215 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1939)
Barnes v. P. D. Manufacturing Co., Inc.
187 A. 186 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1936)
Douma v. Powers
111 A. 401 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
97 S.E. 194, 22 Ga. App. 737, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 725, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/port-wentworth-lumber-co-v-mclean-gactapp-1918.