Legal Opinion

Dumas v. J. L. Todd

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 14, 1956No. 36115PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGardner, P. J.

1. Since there was no consideration shown, the giving of an automobile under the circumstances described herein does not come within the scope of a lottery device. See Equitable Loan & Security Co. v. Waring, 117 Ga. 599 (44 S. E. 320, 62 L. R. A. 93, 97 Am. St. R. 177); Barker v. State, 56 Ga. App. 705 (193 S. E. 605), and Jorman v. State, 54 Ga. App. 738 (188 S. E. 925). Nor is a contractual relationship shown, because of lack of consideration. Moore v. Logan-Long Co., 40 Ga. App. 259 (149 S. E. 321) involved the giving away of roofing by a building materials firm. In that case the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Equitable Loan & Security Co. v. WaringSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
  2. Brosseau v. Jacobs' Pharmacy Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1917
  3. Barker v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1937
  4. Jorman v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936
  5. Moore v. Logan-Long Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1929

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Boyd v. Piggly Wiggly Southern, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1967
  2. Butler v. ShirahCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1980

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

Powered by the Exa API