Legal Opinion

McCluskey v. Still

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 19, 1924No. 14853PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.

1. Although it may be a custom for running accounts to fall due and become payable on January 1 following (Civil Code of 1910, § 3435), yet, for the purpose of foreclosing a lieii arising out of such an account, the account will be regarded as falling due upon “the delivery of the last item constituting a part of the running account covered by the contract.” Park’s Code (1914), § 3353 (2 a); Dunning v. Stovall, 30 Ga. 444; Calhoun Brick Co. v. Pattillo Lumber Co., 10 Ga. App. 181 (2) (73 S. E. 23). A lien cannot be asserted in a suit brought on a running account more than twelve months after…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Calhoun Brick Co. v. Pattillo Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1911
  2. Dunning & Tuttle v. StovallSupreme Court of Georgia · 1860
  3. Porter v. TerrellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1907

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Centennial Equities Corp. v. HollisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
  2. Dixie Lime & Stone Co. v. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1976
  3. Foster & Kleiser, Inc. v. Coe & Payne Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1987
  4. Bryant v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1954
  5. Home Mart Building Centers, Inc. v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975

3 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