Legal Opinion
Barrington v. Davis Jenkins & Sons
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided February 11, 1932No. 21542PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
1. “Recovery may be had upon evidence that the party sought to be charged was the concealed principal of a person who acted in his own name without disclosing his agency, though this fact be not alleged in the pleadings.” Akers v. Kirke, 91 Ga. 590 (6) (18 S. E. 366).
2. “It is the right of one who deals with an agent, who fails to disclose his principal, to proceed against the principal when discovered. [Civil Code of 1910, § 3596.] This right is not dependent on the diligence of the plaintiff in discovering the fact of the concealed agency.” Baldwin v. Garrett, 111 Ga. 876 (36 S. E. 966);…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Akers v. Kirke & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1893
- Pinkston v. Cedar Hill Nursery & Orchard Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Blount & Morel v. DuggerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- Cornelia Planing Mill Co. v. WilcoxSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
- Ætna Insurance v. TrimmierCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1931
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Saliba v. SalibaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1947
- Interstate Financial Corp. v. AppelCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
- Turner v. HardySupreme Court of Georgia · 1944
- Walburn v. TauntonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1963
- Interstate Financial Corp. v. AppelCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.