Waring v. John J. Thompson & Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtTownsend, J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) While the petition as amended alleges in substance that the plaintiff procured a purchaser for said property in accordance with the terms stipulated by the owner, this conclusion of the pleader is dependent upon the construction of the written offer to biiy executed by Mrs. Russell, and the sales-agency contract executed by the defendant. These instruments are both attached to and made parts of the petition, which must be construed in the light of the full contents of the two instruments in order to determine what are its allegations. Therefore it follows…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Moore v. Seaboard Air-Line Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
- Darley v. StarrSupreme Court of Georgia · 1920
- Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. LawleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1925
- Howard v. Sills & PurvisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
- Southern Wood Preserving Co. v. Resaca Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
3Cited by7 opinions
- Weldon v. LashleySupreme Court of Georgia · 1958
- Kuniansky v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1960
- McNabb v. HardemanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1948
- Turner v. Atlanta Realty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1965
- Selton v. DowlingCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1949
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.