Legal Opinion

Casey v. McDaniel

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided September 16, 1922No. 2752PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAtkinson, J.

1. It has been held by this court that “ Where two parties entered into a written contract, whereby one of them was to let the other have fifty acres of land, and was to furnish sufficient stock to cultivate it, and the other was to furnish the labor, and they were to divide the crops, if the former failed to furnish the necessary plow-stock and took charge of the crops, in the absence of any allegation of insolvency, there was an ample remedy at law, and a resort to equity was unnecessary.” Nicholson v. Cook, 76 Ga. 24. See also Bussell V. Bishop, 152 Ga. 428 (110 S. E. 174). Applying the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Nicholson v. CookSupreme Court of Georgia · 1885
  2. Bussell v. BishopSupreme Court of Georgia · 1921

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lyles v. WatsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
  2. Bedgood v. StevensSupreme Court of Georgia · 1946
  3. Hanson v. FletcherSupreme Court of Georgia · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API