Smith v. Brown & Co.
This text of 85 S.E. 950 (Smith v. Brown & Co.) 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.
Opinion
1. There was sufficient evidence to authorize the jury’s finding that credit for the goods included in the account sued on was extended by the plaintiff to the defendant (a married woman) in her individual capacity, and that she was liable for the same. See Connerat v. Goldsmith, 6 Ga. 14; Mitchell v. Treanor, 11 Ga. 324 (3, 4), 326 (56 Am. D. 421); Schofield v. Jones, 85 Ga. 816, 824 (11 S. E. 1032); Goodson v. Powell, 9 Ga. App. 497 (71 S. E. 765); Reynolds v. Starks, ante, 606 (85 S. E. 950).
2. The evidence authorized the verdict. There was no material error of law; and the judgment of the appellate division of the municipal court, refusing a new trial, is Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
85 S.E. 950, 16 Ga. App. 608, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 152, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-brown-co-gactapp-1915.