Legal Opinion

Youngblood v. Armour Fertilizer Works

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided May 14, 1919No. 10087PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Trover; from Taylor superior court; Judge Howard. March 29, 1918.

1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, P. J.

1. “In an action to recover specific chattels, no counterclaim is possible, unless, perhaps, equitable relief may be awarded under some very exceptional circumstances.” Pomeroy, Code Remedies, § 767; Harden v. Long, 110 Ga. 392, 399 (36 S. E. 100).

2. In an action of trover, recoupment in the nature of damages can not be pleaded by the defendant, nor adjudicated, unless some special equity, such as non-residence or the insolvency of the plaintiff, is shown. Bell v. Ober, 111 Ga. 668 (3), 673 (36. S. E. 904).

3. A foreign corporation doing business in this State and having agents located therein…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Harden v. LangSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
  2. Reeves v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1905
  3. Bell v. Ober & Sons Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1900
  4. Barfield Music House v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Hanover Insurance v. Nelson Conveyor & MacHinery Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1981
  2. Ellis, McKinnon & Brown v. HoppsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
  3. Sisson v. RobertsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1920
  4. Hayes v. O'SHIELD BUICK, INC.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1956
  5. Meders v. WirchballCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1951

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API