Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

32 Ga. App. 661

Comer Co. v. Joyner

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 19, 1924

Court of Appeals of Georgia · decided 1924-09-19

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1924-09-19

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently February 2012

1 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

101924193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Stephens, J.

¶11. Where salt in sacks is stored in a house, evidence as to the deleterious condition of salt in one of the sacks is corroborative of evidence as to a similar deleterious condition of salt in every one of the sacks stored in the same place and under the same conditions and surroundings at a time several weeks prior thereto; the probative value of such evidence being for the jury.

¶22. This being a suit by the purchaser against the seller of such salt, to recover damages alleged to have been sustained by the plaintiff because some meat upon which the plaintiff applied the salt became spoiled as the result of the deleterious condition of the salt, and the evidence authorizing the inference that the salt, which was sold with knowledge by the seller that the purchaser intended to use it for the purpose of curing meat, was not suited for that purpose, and that, as a result of its use by the purchaser for the purpose intended, the meat *662became spoiled and totally unfit for use, to the damage of the purchaser in the amount found by the jury, the verdict found for the plaintiff was authorized.

Decided September 19, 1924.H. A. Boylcin, Powell & Morris, for plaintiff in error.Overstreet & Overstreet, contra.

¶3Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Bell, J., concur.
/32/gaapp/661 · .json · Public domain