Schofield's Sons Co. v. Woodward

Supreme Court of Georgia

Schofield's Sons Co. v. Woodward

72 S.E. 509, 137 Ga. 65, 1911 Ga. LEXIS 297

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedOctober 28, 1911

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 72 S.E. 509 (Schofield's Sons Co. v. Woodward) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Schofield's Sons Co. v. Woodward, 72 S.E. 509, 137 Ga. 65, 1911 Ga. LEXIS 297 (Ga. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Holden, J.

1. Where one sells and delivers personalty to a contractor, and retains title thereto, but before the writing evidencing the contract retaining title in the seller is recorded or executed the contractor uses the personalty in the permanent improvement of the real estate of another, the seller cannot recover such personalty from the latter. This is true though the contract between the owner of the real estate and the contractor for the ■ improvement of the former’s property has not been completed, and though the real estate owner has not paid the contractor the full contract price for the improvement of the property, at the time the contract retaining title to the property in the seller is recorded.

2. The court committed no error in directing a verdict in favor of the defendant. .

Judgment affirmed.

Beeh, J., absent. The other Justices concur.

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

Holden, J.

1. Where one sells and delivers personalty to a contractor, and retains title thereto, but before the writing evidencing the contract retaining title in the seller is recorded or executed the contractor uses the personalty in the permanent improvement of the real estate of another, the seller cannot recover such personalty from the latter. This is true though the contract between the owner of the real estate and the contractor for the ■ improvement of the former’s property has not been completed, and though the real estate owner has not paid the contractor the full contract price for the improvement of the property, at the time the contract retaining title to the property in the seller is recorded.

2. The court committed no error in directing a verdict in favor of the defendant. .

Judgment affirmed.

Beeh, J., absent. The other Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 S.E. 509, 137 Ga. 65, 1911 Ga. LEXIS 297, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schofields-sons-co-v-woodward-ga-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack