Price-Evans Foundry Co. v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.

91 S.E. 283, 19 Ga. App. 264, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 90
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided February 1, 1917·No. 8241·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Broyles, P. J.

1. A tliird person dealing with an agent of an undisclosed principal can not hold the principal liable under the contract, where the principal has previously accounted and settled with the agent. Civil Code (1910), § 3596. **“"*300

2. Under the agreed statement of facts, section 3601 of the Civil Code, cited by counsel for the plaintiff in error, is not applicable.

3. The court did not err in directing a verdict for the defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Price-Evans Foundry Co. v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co., 91 S.E. 283, 19 Ga. App. 264, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 90 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

91 S.E. 283 (Price-Evans Foundry Co. v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

American Fund for Public Service, Inc. v. Associated Textiles, Inc.
245 N.W. 376 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1932)
Beacham v. Coe-Mortimer Co.
118 S.E. 441 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)