Daniel v. Swift, Murphy & Co.
Supreme Court of Georgia
Factors. Lien. Estoppel. Before Judge James Johnson. Talbot Superior Court. September Term, 1874. Swift, Murphy & Company brought complaint against Daniel, on an account for $151 80. The defendant pleaded the general issue and set-off as follows: Swift, Murphy & Company to William A. Daniel.
Read the full summary
Factors. Lien. Estoppel. Before Judge James Johnson. Talbot Superior Court. September Term, 1874. Swift, Murphy & Company brought complaint against Daniel, on an account for $151 80. The defendant pleaded the general issue and set-off as follows: Swift, Murphy & Company to William A. Daniel. Dr. February 27, 1869. To six bales of cotton...........$699 50 Interest for six months.......... 26 52 Credit by cash 409 50 $316 52 The evidence presented the following facts: One Perryman deposited with plaintiffs, as warehousemen and factors, six bales of cotton, upon which they made various advances…
1Opinion of the Court
Trippe, Judge.
The mere omission of Swift, Murphy & Company to inform Daniel that they had made advances to Perryman, on the cotton, when Daniel left the receipts with them and directed the sale of the cotton, was not a forfeiture of their lien as factors on the cotton. Had the request made by Daniel to the court to charge the jury gone further, and been authorized by the evidence, to-wit: that if Daniel had been damaged by such omission, then to the extent of such damage he could deny plaintiff’s right to retain for advances made by them, it *115would have presented a different question. But as…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Johnson v. ClarkIndiana Court of Appeals · 1898