TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Willingham Sash & Door Co. v. Drew

WILLINGHAM SASH & DOOR COMPANY v. DREW

Willingham Sash & Door Co. v. Drew, 45 S.E. 237 (Ga. 1903)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Georgia · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 27, 1903
Judges
Cobb
Citations
45 S.E. 237117 Ga. 8501903 Ga. LEXIS 366
Headnotes
1. Where one undertakes to perform for another service or labor for a given sum any amount paid in excess of that sum, not based upon a new consideration, is a mere gratuity. 2. A employed B to build a house for the sum of $1,400. A paid the $1,400 before the completion of the house; and it becoming apparent that B would be unable to comply with the contract without suffering loss, B was told by A to estimate what sum would be necessary to complete the building, and upon being informed that $350 would be required, B was told to complete the building and this amount would be paid in addition. Under this latter arrangement B was to do only what was contemplated by the original contract. After the $1,400 had been paid and before the payment of the $350, A was served with a summons of garnishment in a suit against B, and judgment was rendered in favor of the garnishee. Held: (1) That the agreement to pay the additional sum of $350 was a nudum pactum. (2) That at the time of the service of the summons of garnishment the relation of debtor and creditor did not exist between A and B.
Summary
Garnishment. Before Judge Roberts. .Irwin superior court. September 2, 1902.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Cobb

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Cobb, J.

The facts of this case sufficiently appear from the second headnote. The case is controlled by the principle laid down in the case of Davis & Company v. Morgan, 117 Ga. 505 .

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 18 cases

View all citing references →
1910: 11915: 11925: 21926: 11928: 11929: 11940: 11943: 11945: 11947: 11951: 11956: 11967: 11968: 11972: 11975: 11987: 119102026peak 1925 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Trustees of Jesse Parker Williams Hospital v. Nisbet7 S.E.2d 737 (Ga. 1940)
  2. Herbert's Laurel-Ventura Inc. v. Laurel Ventura Holding Corp.138 P.2d 43 (Cal. Ct. App. 1943)
  3. Hiers-Wright Associates, Inc. v. Manufacturers Hanover Mortgage Corp.356 S.E.2d 903 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987)
  4. Leggett v. Vinson124 So. 472 (Miss. 1929)
  5. Bankers Trust & Audit Co. v. Farmers & Merchants Bank136 S.E. 143 (Ga. 1926)
  6. Duncan v. Cone Inc.85 S.E. 203 (Ga. Ct. App. 1915)

Most recent

  1. Hiers-Wright Associates, Inc. v. Manufacturers Hanover Mortgage Corp.356 S.E.2d 903 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987)
  2. Management Search, Inc. v. Morgan222 S.E.2d 154 (Ga. Ct. App. 1975)
  3. Blackmon v. DeKalb Pipeline Co.193 S.E.2d 635 (Ga. Ct. App. 1972)
  4. Robert Chuckrow Construction Co. v. Gough159 S.E.2d 469 (Ga. Ct. App. 1968)
  5. Continental Casualty Co. v. Wilson-Avery, Inc.156 S.E.2d 152 (Ga. Ct. App. 1967)
  6. James v. Jacobsen91 S.E.2d 527 (Ga. Ct. App. 1956)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Davis & Co. v. Morgan, 61 L.R.A. 148 (Ga. 1903) 68

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list