Legal Opinion

Anchor Duck Mills v. Harp

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided November 15, 1929No. 19491PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, P. J.

1. “ Cotton . . or other products sold by planters or commission merchants, on cash sale, shall not be considered as the property of the buyer until fully paid for, although it may have been delivered to the buyer.” Civil Code (1910), § 4136. Bank checks are not payment until themselves paid. Civil Code (1910), § 4314; Manget v. National City Bank, 168 Ga. 876 (2) (149 S. E. 213). Thus, in the absence of an agreement to the contrary, where there is a cash sale of cotton by a planter and he receives a check for the purchase-price, the title to the cotton does not pass until payment of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Flannery v. HarleySupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
  2. Comer v. DufourSupreme Court of Georgia · 1895
  3. Manget v. National City BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1929
  4. Pearson v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1916
  5. Merritt v. Gate City National BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Capital Automobile Co. v. WardCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936
  2. Stapleton v. DismukesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1931
  3. Blocker v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1938
  4. Fullerton Cotton Mills Inc. v. ButlerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1951
  5. Alco Feed Mills v. HollisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API