Seaboard Lumber Co. v. Cornelia Planing Mill Co.

Supreme Court of Georgia

Seaboard Lumber Co. v. Cornelia Planing Mill Co.

50 S.E. 121, 122 Ga. 370, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 210

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMarch 7, 1905

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 50 S.E. 121 (Seaboard Lumber Co. v. Cornelia Planing Mill Co.) 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

Seaboard Lumber Co. v. Cornelia Planing Mill Co., 50 S.E. 121, 122 Ga. 370, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 210 (Ga. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

Lamar, J.

(After stating the facts.) Where goods of one quality are ordered, and those of an inferior quality are shipped, the rights of the parties and the measure of damages become fixed, at the moment of the breach. The plaintiff here became entitled to the difference in value between-No. 1 lumber ordered and the inferior lumber shipped. A resale was one of the methods of arriving at the amount of the damage. But while the plaintiff was not obliged to resell, it was bound to establish the amount of its damages measured by the rules of law applicable to such cáses. Americus Co. v. Brackett, 119 Ga. 489 ; cf. Civil Code, § 355. This it did. The car of lumber was sufficiently identified. There was no variance between the proof and the material allegations of-the petition. We find no error in the refusal to grant a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Lamar, J.

(After stating the facts.) Where goods of one quality are ordered, and those of an inferior quality are shipped, the rights of the parties and the measure of damages become fixed, at the moment of the breach. The plaintiff here became entitled to the difference in value between-No. 1 lumber ordered and the inferior lumber shipped. A resale was one of the methods of arriving at the amount of the damage. But while the plaintiff was not obliged to resell, it was bound to establish the amount of its damages measured by the rules of law applicable to such cáses. Americus Co. v. Brackett, 119 Ga. 489 ; cf. Civil Code, § 355. This it did. The car of lumber was sufficiently identified. There was no variance between the proof and the material allegations of-the petition. We find no error in the refusal to grant a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 S.E. 121, 122 Ga. 370, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 210, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seaboard-lumber-co-v-cornelia-planing-mill-co-ga-1905.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack