Legal Opinion

Herzfeld v. Southern Saw Mill Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided December 7, 1923No. 14501PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, P. J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) It is-the contention of counsel for defendant in error that “there never was any refusal by the buyer to take and pay for the goods; that under the contract the buj^er had the right to request a cancellation, and this would not amount to a breach; that the seller distinctly avers that the goods were manufactured and ready for delivery under the contract before the buyer requested a cancellation, and at that time the seller had as a part of the contract its positive shipping instructions;” that “under these-circumstances he could not fail or refuse to carry…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Oklahoma Vinegar Co. v. Carter & FordSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  2. Phosphate Mining Co. v. Atlanta Oil & Fertilizer Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
  3. Bennett v. MannCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1919

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Southern Saw Mill Co. v. HerzfieldCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API