Steverson v. Bancroft
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Attachment; from city court of Atlanta—Judge Keid. March 13, 1920. The action was for breach of a contract of sale alleged to have been made in certain letters, which the defendant in his demurrer contended did not constitute a complete and binding contract and were not sufficient under the statute of frauds.
Read the full summary
Attachment; from city court of Atlanta—Judge Keid. March 13, 1920. The action was for breach of a contract of sale alleged to have been made in certain letters, which the defendant in his demurrer contended did not constitute a complete and binding contract and were not sufficient under the statute of frauds. The letters (except heading, address, and signature) were as follows: (1) Plaintiff (at Atlanta, Ga.) to defendant (Birmingham, Ala.): April 29, 1919. “Kindly enter our order for the following, to be shipped shipping instructions to address below: Terms 2% off 10 days. F. o. b. Atlanta,…
1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, C. J.
The petition as amended set out a cause of action, and the court did not err in overruling the general demurrer interposed.
Judgment affirmed.
Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. The petition as amended sets out these letters and alleges, that the plaintiff’s order bore the number 1032, and that the two letters of the defendant, set forth above, constituted a complete and unqualified acceptance of the plaintiff’s order; that the contract calls for one car of B. and Better flooring at the price of $38.50 per m.; that there is a universal usage and custom among those engaged in the lumber business…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Tippins v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Davie v. Lumberman's Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1892
- North & Co. v. Mendel & BrotherSupreme Court of Georgia · 1884
- Monk v. McDanielSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- Robinson v. WellerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.