Legal Opinion

Douglas v. Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 6, 1924No. 14801PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtLuke, J.

1. A plea to a suit on a note, that so far as the defendant could ascertain, six tons of the fertilizer for which the note was given did not have any of the ingredients of commercial fertilizer and were absolutely worthless, “because the same as mixed was unsuited to the soil and crops for which it was intended and bought,” is not a good defense to a fertilizer note containing the following stipulations: “which fertilizer I accept without warranty from the company or its agent as to its quality or value, leaving me to rely solely on the fact that the laws of this State have been complied…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Arlington Oil & Guano Co. v. SwannCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1913
  2. Terry v. Swift & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
  3. Branson v. Piedmont Fertilizer Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1915

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Seigler v. BarrowCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1951

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

Powered by the Exa API