Treat Orchard Co. v. General Chemical Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Treat Orchard Co. v. General Chemical Co.

8 S.E.2d 168, 62 Ga. App. 305, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 645

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 7, 1940

Docket28071.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 8 S.E.2d 168 (Treat Orchard Co. v. General Chemical 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.

Bluebook

Treat Orchard Co. v. General Chemical Co., 8 S.E.2d 168, 62 Ga. App. 305, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 645 (Ga. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinions

Per Curiam.

Suit was brought on a number of promissory-notes, and the makers sought to set off against the liability on the notes damages alleged to have resulted from the plaintiff’s breach of a contract in which it is contended plaintiff promised to furnish *308 defendants with certain insecticides for peach and apple orchards in 1937. The answer alleged that the plaintiff breached its contract in July, 1937. The notes sued on were dated September 1, 1937, and were given for insecticides furnished to the defendants under the contract. While the answer, alleged that the defendants did not know what damages they would suffer by reason of the plaintiff’s breach of the contract until 1938, it shows that defendants knew in July, 1937, of the breach of the contract. The execution by the defendants of the notes sued on, after they were fully aware of the breach, was a waiver of the breach which they can not now plead in defense to a. suit on the notes. It was not error for the court to sustain the general demurrer to the defendants’ plea and answer. Consequently the court properly directed a verdict for the plaintiff, and entered judgment accordingly, after the amount of an alleged overcharge had been written off by the plaintiff. Judgment affirmed.

Stephens, P. J., and Felton, J., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

Suit was brought on a number of promissory-notes, and the makers sought to set off against the liability on the notes damages alleged to have resulted from the plaintiff’s breach of a contract in which it is contended plaintiff promised to furnish *308 defendants with certain insecticides for peach and apple orchards in 1937. The answer alleged that the plaintiff breached its contract in July, 1937. The notes sued on were dated September 1, 1937, and were given for insecticides furnished to the defendants under the contract. While the answer, alleged that the defendants did not know what damages they would suffer by reason of the plaintiff’s breach of the contract until 1938, it shows that defendants knew in July, 1937, of the breach of the contract. The execution by the defendants of the notes sued on, after they were fully aware of the breach, was a waiver of the breach which they can not now plead in defense to a. suit on the notes. It was not error for the court to sustain the general demurrer to the defendants’ plea and answer. Consequently the court properly directed a verdict for the plaintiff, and entered judgment accordingly, after the amount of an alleged overcharge had been written off by the plaintiff. Judgment affirmed.

Stephens, P. J., and Felton, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 S.E.2d 168, 62 Ga. App. 305, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 645, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/treat-orchard-co-v-general-chemical-co-gactapp-1940.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack