Snellgrove v. Dingelhoef
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Complaint; from Fulton superior court — Judge Bell. June 14, 1919. Snellgrove contracted with Dingelhoef for the purchase of an automobile, but no particular automobile was selected at the time. It was expressly agreed and understood that a new automobile was later to be delivered.
Read the full summary
Complaint; from Fulton superior court — Judge Bell. June 14, 1919. Snellgrove contracted with Dingelhoef for the purchase of an automobile, but no particular automobile was selected at the time. It was expressly agreed and understood that a new automobile was later to be delivered. In pursuance of this agreement Dingelhoef later, on receipt of the purchase-money from Snellgrove, delivered to the latter’s representative an automobile which Snellgrove received while ill, but after his recovery and after using the automobile, he discovered, on close inspection, that, instead of being a new one…
1ConcurrenceJenkins, P. J.
While I concur in the Judgment arrived at in this case, the reasons which control such a conclusion do not appear to altogether coincide with the views expressed by the majority members of the court, especially in the first division of the *338syllabus. In many jurisdictions even an executed contract of purchase and sale may be rescinded on account of a mere breach of warranty. See Williston on Sales, § 608. But the law of this State as embodied in § 4136 of the Civil Code provides that "a breach of warranty, express or implied, does not annul the sale if executed, but gives the purchaser a right…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Henderson Elevator Co. v. North Georgia Milling Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1906
- Miller & Co. v. Moore, Sims & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1889
- Cook & Co. v. FinchSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Adams v. BarrettSupreme Court of Georgia · 1848
- Americus Grocery Co. v. Brackett & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1904
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.