Strickland v. McElveen

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Strickland v. McElveen

93 S.E. 24, 20 Ga. App. 320, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 882

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 18, 1917

Docket8444

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 93 S.E. 24 (Strickland v. McElveen) 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

Strickland v. McElveen, 93 S.E. 24, 20 Ga. App. 320, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 882 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

George, J.

1. The bill of sale conveying “the boiler and attachments thereto,” the consideration for the note up'on which the suit was brought, was ambiguous as to the articles conveyed under the term “attachments,” and the court did not err in admitting parol testimony to explain the ambiguity.

2. The exception to the charge of the court, upon the ground that it incorrectly stated the defendant’s contentions, is without merit.

3. On the question of failure of consideration the evidence, though conflicting, authorized the verdict returned by the jury.-

4. The alleged newly discovered evidence is of slight relevancy, and is purely impeaching and cumulative in character.

5. The court did not err in overruling the motion for new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, O. J., and Luloe, J., concur.

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