Ward v. Capital Automobile Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.
1. “Fraud” which, under the Code, § 82-101, authorizes the issuance of a possessory warrant to recover a personal chattel which has been taken, enticed, or carried away by fraud from the possession of the party complaining, is only that fraud by which the mere possession of the property is acquired, and is not fraud inhering in the procure*538ment of the contract tinder which the possession of the property was acquired. Jackson v. Sparks, 36 Ga. 445; Amos v. Dougherty, 65 Ga. 612; Welborn v. Shirly, 65 Ga. 695.
Decided June 18, 1936. J. D. Tindall, G. N. Davie, J. F. Kemp, for plaintiff in error.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Welborn v. ShirlySupreme Court of Georgia · 1880
- Amos v. DoughertySupreme Court of Georgia · 1880
- Jackson v. SparksSupreme Court of Georgia · 1867
3Cited by1 opinion
- Capital Automobile Co. v. WardCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936