Legal Opinion

Troup v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided January 9, 1951No. 33230, 33378PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMacIntyre, P. J.

The statute under which the defendant was indicted in each of these cases is as follows: “Any person engaged, either on his own account or for others, in the business of buying cotton, corn, rice, crude turpentine, spirits of turpentine, rosin, pitch, tar, cattle, hogs, sheep, goats, horses, pecans, peaches, apples, watermelons, cantaloupes, and mules, or other products or chattels sold by planters and commission merchants on cash sale, who shall buy such articles on sale from a planter, or commission merchant for cash, and shall fail or refuse to pay for, and shall make way with or dispose…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1892
  2. Cook v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1918
  3. Herring v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
  4. Abel v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1941
  5. Walthour v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hudson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
  2. State v. SolomonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1965
  3. Marshall v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1972
  4. Shaw v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API