Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

National City Bank of Rome v. Graham

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 9, 1962No. 39004Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partHall, Judge

I concur in the rulings and judgment in Division 1, and dissent from the rulings and judgment in Division 2.

I differ with the majority’s construction of the petition in these respects: The allegations which, in the majority view, show that the seller learned that the plaintiff procured the purchaser after a contract of sale was entered into- (Pars. 14, 15, 16) are simply allegations that on a certain date plaintiff learned that The Citizens & Southern National Bank had made a bid and Brittain Bros. Company had accepted it, whereupon plaintiff took certain action, i.e., informed Brittain Bros.…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Frazier v. Southern Railway CompanySupreme Court of Georgia · 1946
  2. Cook v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1960
  3. Reynolds v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1961
  4. Toler v. GoodinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1946
  5. National Bank v. EvansSupreme Court of Georgia · 1919

15 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