Legal Opinion

Quillian & Bros. v. Wales Adding Machine Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided June 9, 1925No. 16363PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBloodworth, J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) While the defendants alleged in their plea that Clary was the agent of the plaintiff, there is no evidence that in this transaction he was anything more than an agent to sell, a special agent. Indeed, D. T. Quillian, a member of the defendant firm, swore that “this man Clary came to us because I called the Wales Adding Machine Company and told them to send a man to fix the machine we had.” The question of the sale arose after the arrival of Clary. “Agency to sell does not necessarily carry with it agency and authority to collect.” Collins v. Crews, 3 Ga.…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Walton Guano Co. v. McCallSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
  2. Southern Railway Co. v. GrantSupreme Court of Georgia · 1911
  3. Americus Oil Co. v. GurrSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  4. Collins & Toole v. CrewsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
  5. Baldwin Fertilizer Co. v. Thompson McAlisterSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Carter v. KimCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1981
  2. ROYAL OIL COMPANY, INC. v. HooksCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1965
  3. Royal Oil Co. v. HooksCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API