Legal Opinion

Yaryan Rosin & Turpentine Co. v. Haskins

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 23, 1923No. 13710PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.)

The motion for a new trial complains of the following charge of the court: “ You will- see by the original contract that the removal under the original contract was to have been completed by March 1, 1918. Subsequently, in writing, the parties agreed *756among themselves for a three months’ extension of that contract, and the contract in its present form, with that extension, binds and obligates the defendant to remove the described wood and stumps from the land by whatever date yon find that three months extension to be, unless you find from the evidence that…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Hume v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  2. Bearden Mercantile Co. v. Madison Oil Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1907
  3. Sumner v. SumnerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
  4. Chapman v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
  5. Robinson v. SchlySupreme Court of Georgia · 1849

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. McRae v. BoykinCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
  2. Redd & Co. v. Lathem & SonsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1924
  3. Sheffield v. HammondCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1930
  4. Daniels v. LutonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1930
  5. PREMIER PETROLEUM, INC. v. HEER, INC.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API