Legal Opinion

Fain v. Neal

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided April 17, 1958No. 37091PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Quillian, Judge.

In Haupt v. Horovitz, 31 Ga. App. 203 (1) (120 S. E. 425) it is well stated: “ ‘An action for money had and received lies in all cases where another has received money which the plaintiff, ex aequo et bono, is entitled to recover and which the defendant is not entitled in good conscience to retain.’. Zapf Realty Co. v. Brown, 26 Ga. App. 443 (106 S. E. 748); Whitehead v. Peck, 1 Ga. 140 (3); Knight v. Roberts, 17 Ga. App. 527 (87 S. E. 809). In such an action ‘the law implies a promise on the part of any person who has received the money of another to pay that person on…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Citizens Bank v. RudisillCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
  2. Whitehead v. PeckSupreme Court of Georgia · 1846
  3. Bates-Farley Savings Bank v. DismukesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
  4. Central Railroad v. First National BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1884
  5. Haupt v. HorovitzCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Plitt v. GreenbergCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1966
  2. Taylor v. Powertel, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2001
  3. J. C. Penney Co. v. WestCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1976
  4. Race, Inc. v. Wade Leasing, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1991
  5. HAUGABOOK v. CrislerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2009

7 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