Winter Bros. v. Jackson
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Felton, Chief Judge.
1. The defendant contends that the amended petition did not contain a sufficient description of the property to- withstand a general demurrer. The contention is without merit. The following are representative of the descriptions of the various articles: “1 head for 200 gal. mixer, 42" over all, Yz" steel, seamless, value $180.00”, “1 contractor’s drum hoist and base, value $250.00”, “2 International centrifuges and 3 additional bronze heads, value $400.00”, “1 truck transmission, value $12.00”, “2 Turbula agitators 6", value $300.00”. It was alleged that the described…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Graham v. RainesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1951
- Redd & Co. v. Lathem & SonsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1922
- Roddenberry v. FoucheCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1920
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hayes v. FlaumCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1976
- Lawyers Co-Operative Publishing Co. v. Bekins Moving & Storage Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1976