TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Joseph Costa Co. v. Hawkins

Joseph Costa Company Inc. v. Hawkins

Joseph Costa Co. v. Hawkins, 179 S.E. 159 (Ga. Ct. App. 1935)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Appeals of Georgia · State Appellate Courts
Decided
February 22, 1935
Docket
No. 24146
Judges
Stephens
Citations
179 S.E. 15950 Ga. App. 6261935 Ga. App. LEXIS 250

Opinion of the Court — Stephens

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

Stephens, J.

1. The evidence was sufficient to authorize the inference that the plaintiff, in a suit to recover for labor and material alleged to have been furnished in making repairs upon property of the defendant, was a manufacturer of ice cream, which it sold and distributed to merchants, and that it furnished to the defendant, who was a merchant selling ice cream to the trade, an apparatus called a compressor, which was used by the defendant in connection with the defendant’s soda-fount in the handling and storage of ice cream furnished by the plaintiff, that the plaintiff had contracted to keep the compressor in repair and to keep up the defendant’s soda-fount without cost to the defendant, and that also it was a universal custom of the trade for a manufacturer such as the plaintiff to do such work free of charge, that the amount sued for was for labor and material furnished by the plaintiff in repairing the compressor which it had furnished to the defendant, and in keeping the *627 defendant’s soda-fountain in repair, and that therefore the defendant was not indebted to the plaintiff.' The verdict for the defendant was authorized.

Decided February 22, 1935. B. G. Jenldns, D. D. Veal, for plaintiff. M. F. Adams, for defendant.

2. The plea which set up the defenses above indicated was good as against general demurrer.

3. The superior court did not err in overruling the plaintiff’s certiorari.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenhms, P. J., a/nd Sutton, J., concur.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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