Shingler Auto Co. v. Gamble

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Shingler Auto Co. v. Gamble

105 S.E. 628, 26 Ga. App. 139, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 29

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 20, 1921

Docket11586

StatusPublished

This text of 105 S.E. 628 (Shingler Auto Co. v. Gamble) 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

Shingler Auto Co. v. Gamble, 105 S.E. 628, 26 Ga. App. 139, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 29 (Ga. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

Stephens, J.

In a suit in trover in which the plaintiff sought to recover the money value of personalty described in the petition as “ One Chevrolet five-passenger touring car, 1917 model, motor number 71416,” which had been sold by the plaintiff to a third person under a retention of title [140]*140contract, evidence that the defendant had'in his possession one Chevrolet five-passenger touring car, 1917 model, which he had acquired from such third person, did not, in the absence of any evidence more specifically identifying the car, demand the inference that the car in the defendant’s possession was the car described in the petition. Since a verdict for the plaintiff is not demanded by the evidence, the verdict rendered for the defendant cannot be set aside as being contrary to law.

Decided January 20, 1921.

Trover; from city court of Albany — Judge Clayton Jones. May 17, 1920.

Milner £ Farlcas, for plaintiff. Peacock £ Gardner, Benlon Odom, for defendant.

Judgment affirmed*.

Jenkins, P. J., and Sill, J., concur.

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

Stephens, J.

In a suit in trover in which the plaintiff sought to recover the money value of personalty described in the petition as “ One Chevrolet five-passenger touring car, 1917 model, motor number 71416,” which had been sold by the plaintiff to a third person under a retention of title [140]*140contract, evidence that the defendant had'in his possession one Chevrolet five-passenger touring car, 1917 model, which he had acquired from such third person, did not, in the absence of any evidence more specifically identifying the car, demand the inference that the car in the defendant’s possession was the car described in the petition. Since a verdict for the plaintiff is not demanded by the evidence, the verdict rendered for the defendant cannot be set aside as being contrary to law.

Decided January 20, 1921.

Trover; from city court of Albany — Judge Clayton Jones. May 17, 1920.

Milner £ Farlcas, for plaintiff. Peacock £ Gardner, Benlon Odom, for defendant.

Judgment affirmed*.

Jenkins, P. J., and Sill, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 S.E. 628, 26 Ga. App. 139, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 29, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shingler-auto-co-v-gamble-gactapp-1921.