Legal Opinion

Kendrick & Co. v. Visage

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided January 19, 1892PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Contracts. Master and servant. New trial. Before Judge Maddox. Walker superior court. February term, 1891.

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment affirmed.

Yisage sued Kendrick & Co. on an account for balance claimed to be due for mining ore, and obtained a verdict. Tbe defendant’s motion for a new trial was overruled. The grounds of tbe motion were, (1-2) that the verdict was contrary to law and evidence, and (8) that the court erred in refusing to charge thus: “If the plaintiff received sixty-five cents per ton for ore mined i>y him, for the months of May, June and Juiy, or for any other series of consecutive months, and did not, at the time of receiving said payment, distinctly notify the defendants that he would insist upon…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Powers v. Rutland RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1914
  2. LEND LEASE TRANSPORTATION COMPANY v. McBrideCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API