Hall v. Lecroy

The only question before the court in this case for determination is: Was the defendant LeCroy an innocent purchaser from Gilstrap?

We think that this case is controlled by the rulings made in Capital Automobile Co. v. Ward, 54 Ga. App. 873, 876, 877 (189 S. E. 713), and Blount v. Bainbridge, 79 Ga. App. 99 (53 S. E. 2d, 122). In the former case it was said: “It is quite true, as earnestly asserted by counsel for the plaintiff in error, that in the sale of personal property the doctrine of caveat emptor applies . . ; and that 'while possession of personal property is presumptive evidence of…