Wesley v. Boyd
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Powell, J.
The material question in the case is controlled by Brandon v. Pritchett, 126 Ga. 286 ( 55 S. E. 241 ). The plaintiff in error has requested that the question involved be certified to the Supreme Court, in order that a motion to review and overrule that case may be presented; but, since there appears no reasonable ground for a belief that the Supreme Court would recede from its former decision, the request is denied. See, also, the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Kaigler v. Brannon, 137 Ga. ( 72 S. E. 400 ).
Judgment affirmed.
It was contended on the part of the defendant that the contract for the sale of the cotton was the contract of Drewry, and not of the defendant, and that Drewry had no authority to make it. T. E. Patterson, for plaintiff in error, cited Civil Code (1910), §§ 3570, 3574, 3222, and the dissenting opinion in Brandon v. Pritchett, 126 Ga. 286 , and requested that the question involved be certified to the Supreme Court, in order that a motion to review that case might be presented. J. D. Boyd, Cleveland & Goodrich, contra, cited Dozier v. Mc-Whorter, 117 Ga. 788 -9; Brandon v. Pritchett, supra; Smith v. Farmers Mut. Ins. Asso., Ill Ga. 739; Colquitt v. Smith, 76 Ga. 709 ; Brown v. Colquitt, 73 Ga. 59 .
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
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.