Hillis v. Comer & Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Complaint; from city court of Waynesboro — Judge Davis. April 30, 1913.
1Opinion of the CourtRussell, J.
The plaintiff in error purchased 48 tons of fertilizer and gave his note for $1,080 therefor. When he was sued on the note he filed a plea that the sacks containing the guano did not have attached to them the tags sent out upon application by the Department of Agriculture. He did not defend upon the ground that no inspection of the fertilizer had been made, or that the guaranteed analysis of the ingredients had not been stamped on the sacks as required by law, or that the fertilizer sold did not come up to and correspond with the guaranteed analysis, nor did he plead that the manufacturers or…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Murray v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
- Ford & Pruett v. ThomasonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1912
- Griner v. Baggs & PerryCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
- Hamlin v. Rogers, Worsham & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1887
- Holt v. Navassa Guano Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1902
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Arlington Oil & Guano Co. v. SwannCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1913
- Fletcher v. Armour Fertilizer WorksCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1916
- Planters Fertilizer Co. v. WheelerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1914
- Ritchey v. Armour Fertilizer WorksCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1916