Legal Opinion

Woodbury v. Atlanta Dental Supply Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 4, 1927No. 17488PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.

1. Since, in a suit in trover, a conversion of the property sued for may be shown although the property be not in the possession of the defendant at the time of the filing of the suit, it follows that, in a suit where the petition alleges that the property sued for is in the possession of the defendant, a verdict for the plaintiff will not be set aside upon the ground that the plaintiff has failed to prove that at the time of filing the suit the defendant was in possession of the property. Wilkin v. Boykin, 56 Ga. 45; Chambless v. Livingston, 123 Ga. 257 (51 S. E. 314); Citizens Bank of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Young v. DurhamCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1915
  2. Chambless v. LivingstonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
  3. Savannah, Griffin & North Alabama Railroad v. Wilcox, Gibbs & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1873
  4. Garrett v. Atlanta Home UnderwritersCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1926
  5. Holland v. LawrenceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1917

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Talley v. Commercial Credit Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
  2. Columbus Heating & Ventilating Co. v. BurtCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
  3. Whitworth v. CarterCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
  4. Zachos v. RowlandCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1949

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

Powered by the Exa API