Russell v. Wineburg

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Russell v. Wineburg

117 S.E. 666, 30 Ga. App. 319, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 429

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 21, 1923

Docket14147

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 117 S.E. 666 (Russell v. Wineburg) 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

Russell v. Wineburg, 117 S.E. 666, 30 Ga. App. 319, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 429 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

Je.xkins, P. J.

This was a suit in the municipal court of Macon for “ Bal. to Mdse, as per acet. stated, $9.00, which deft, promised to pay, but which he failed to pay.” The defendant specially demurred to the use of the words “ Balance to merchandise ” in the statement, and the demurrer was overruled. The evidence of the plaintiff that the defendant had acknowledged the correctness of the account and had agreed to pay it, and of another person to the same effect, was entirely uncontradicted. The trial judge directed a verdict for the plaintiff, for the amount sued for, and the judge of the superior court refused to sanction the defendant’s petition for certiorari. Held:

1. The use of the words “ Bal. to Mdse.,” in the statement attached to the sumnions, did not render it subject to special demurrer as evidencing a misjoinder of causes.

2. “ An account stated is an agreement between persons who have had previous transactions, fixing the amount due in respect of such transactions, and promising payment.” Moore v. Hendrix, 144 Ga. 646 (1 а) (87 S. E. 195). “Originally an account stated presupposed mutual or counter accounts. The present rule, however, is that mutuality is not a prerequisite of an account stated.” 1 R. C. L. 209 (§ б) . Judgment affirmed.

Stephens and Bell, JJ., concur.

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

Je.xkins, P. J.

This was a suit in the municipal court of Macon for “ Bal. to Mdse, as per acet. stated, $9.00, which deft, promised to pay, but which he failed to pay.” The defendant specially demurred to the use of the words “ Balance to merchandise ” in the statement, and the demurrer was overruled. The evidence of the plaintiff that the defendant had acknowledged the correctness of the account and had agreed to pay it, and of another person to the same effect, was entirely uncontradicted. The trial judge directed a verdict for the plaintiff, for the amount sued for, and the judge of the superior court refused to sanction the defendant’s petition for certiorari. Held:

1. The use of the words “ Bal. to Mdse.,” in the statement attached to the sumnions, did not render it subject to special demurrer as evidencing a misjoinder of causes.

2. “ An account stated is an agreement between persons who have had previous transactions, fixing the amount due in respect of such transactions, and promising payment.” Moore v. Hendrix, 144 Ga. 646 (1 а) (87 S. E. 195). “Originally an account stated presupposed mutual or counter accounts. The present rule, however, is that mutuality is not a prerequisite of an account stated.” 1 R. C. L. 209 (§ б) . Judgment affirmed.

Stephens and Bell, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 S.E. 666, 30 Ga. App. 319, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 429, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/russell-v-wineburg-gactapp-1923.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack