Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co. v. Wisenbaker

89 S.E. 1053, 18 Ga. App. 528, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 1099
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 15, 1916
Docket7422
StatusPublished

This text of 89 S.E. 1053 (Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co. v. Wisenbaker) 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
Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co. v. Wisenbaker, 89 S.E. 1053, 18 Ga. App. 528, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 1099 (Ga. Ct. App. 1916).

Opinion

Wade, C. J.

1. “The fact that the husband cultivates his wife’s lands does not raise -a presumption of law or of fact that he is her agent.” Jones v. Harrell, 110 Ga. 373 (3), 379 (35 S. E. 690). See also Blount v. Dugger, 115 Ga. 109 (41 S. E. 270); Axson v. Belt, 103 Ga. 578 (30 S. E. 262); Cornelia Planmg Mill Co. v. Wilcox, 129 Ga. 522 (59 S. E. 223).

[529]*529Decided September 15, 1916. Complaint; from city court of Valdosta — Judge Cranford. March 7, 1916. G. E. Simpson, for plaintiff. Denmark & Griffin, for defendant.

2. In this case there was no evidence of a direct sale to the defendant herself, and none from which it could he legitimately inferred that her husband, who made the purchase, was actually acting as her agent or that she received the benefit of the fertilizers sold to him. The court therefore did not err in awarding a nonsuit. Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Axson v. Belt
30 S.E. 262 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1898)
Jones v. Harrell
35 S.E. 690 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1900)
Blount & Morel v. Dugger
41 S.E. 270 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1902)
Cornelia Planing Mill Co. v. Wilcox
59 S.E. 223 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
89 S.E. 1053, 18 Ga. App. 528, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 1099, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/virginia-carolina-chemical-co-v-wisenbaker-gactapp-1916.