Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 Georgia opinions name it 1 courts 1971–1984 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Georgia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Pepsico Truck Rental, Inc. v. Eastern Foods, Inc.green2 sentences1984This court has held, in American Warehouse &c. of Atlanta v. Floyd’s Diesel Service, 164 Ga. App. 106 ( 296 SE2d 64 ), where the defendant “undertook the rebuilding of appellant’s diesel engine” (which correctly summarizes the facts of the instant case), that “the warranty provisions of Code Ann. § 109A-2—314) [now OCGA § 11-2-314] are applicable ‘only to the sale of goods, and not services . . .’” Accord Pepsico Truck Rental v. Eastern Foods, 145 Ga. App. 410, 412 ( 243 SE2d 662 ). 1984This court has held, in American Warehouse &c. of Atlanta v. Floyd’s Diesel Service, 164 Ga. App. 106 ( 296 SE2d 64 ), where the defendant “undertook the rebuilding of appellant’s diesel engine” (which correctly summarizes the facts of the instant case), that “the warranty provisions of Code Ann. § 109A-2—314) [now OCGA § 11-2-314] are applicable ‘only to the sale of goods, and not services . . .’” Accord Pepsico Truck Rental v. Eastern Foods, 145 Ga. App. 410, 412 ( 243 SE2d 662 ). | 2 | 2 |
Hopkins v. City of Philadelphiagreen2 sentences1982His contention that the agreement was for a “provisional sale” rather than a lease of the automobile is made for the first time on appeal, “[a]nd even had appellant’s argument on this issue had any merit, his failure to raise it in the trial court in any manner provides no basis for consideration by *395 this court. [Cit.]” Hopkins v. City of Philadelphia, 155 Ga. App. 534, 535 (3) ( 271 SE2d 672 ). 1982His contention that the agreement was for a “provisional sale” rather than a lease of the automobile is made for the first time on appeal, “[a]nd even had appellant’s argument on this issue had any merit, his failure to raise it in the trial court in any manner provides no basis for consideration by *395 this court. [Cit.]” Hopkins v. City of Philadelphia, 155 Ga. App. 534, 535 (3) ( 271 SE2d 672 ). | 1 | 1 |
McMichael v. Georgia Power Co.green2 sentences1980See, e.g., McMichael v. Ga. Power Co., 133 Ga. App. 593 ( 211 SE2d 632 ) (1974). 3. 1980See, e.g., McMichael v. Ga. Power Co., 133 Ga. App. 593 ( 211 SE2d 632 ) (1974). 3. | 1 | 1 |
National Bank v. Refrigerated Transport Co.green2 sentences1979Bank of Ga. v. Refrigerated Transport Co., 147 Ga. App. 240, 245 ( 248 SE2d 496 ) (1978), this court held that " '[t]he indorsements were irregular enough on their face to raise some question as to their validity; and certainly when the checks were offered for deposit into the . . . account of one not the payee, [the bank] had a duty to inquire to ascertain the authority of [the depositor] to indorse and deposit [the payee’s] checks. [The bank] could not escape its duty of inquiry by relying on the word of its customer, [the depositor], [Cits.]; nor does the fact that [the bank] could proceed 1979Bank of Ga. v. Refrigerated Transport Co., 147 Ga. App. 240, 245 ( 248 SE2d 496 ) (1978), this court held that " '[t]he indorsements were irregular enough on their face to raise some question as to their validity; and certainly when the checks were offered for deposit into the . . . account of one not the payee, [the bank] had a duty to inquire to ascertain the authority of [the depositor] to indorse and deposit [the payee’s] checks. [The bank] could not escape its duty of inquiry by relying on the word of its customer, [the depositor], [Cits.]; nor does the fact that [the bank] could proceed | 1 | 1 |
Pierce v. Liberty Furniture Co.red2 sentences1978See Pierce v. Liberty Furniture Co., 141 Ga. App. 175 ( 233 SE2d 33 ). 1978See Pierce v. Liberty Furniture Co., 141 Ga. App. 175 ( 233 SE2d 33 ). | 1 | 1 |
Sheeskin v. Giant Food, Inc.green1 sentence1976See Seigel v. Giant Food, Inc., 20 Md. | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Williamsgreen2 sentences1973See Smith v. Williams, 117 Ga. 782, 784 ( 45 SE 394 , 97 ASR 220) for the rule prior to Ga. L. 1957, p. 405 (formerly Code Ann. § 96-307) which was repealed with enactment of the UCC in 1962 (Ga. L. 1962, pp. 156, 427). 1973See Smith v. Williams, 117 Ga. 782, 784 ( 45 SE 394 , 97 ASR 220) for the rule prior to Ga. L. 1957, p. 405 (formerly Code Ann. § 96-307) which was repealed with enactment of the UCC in 1962 (Ga. L. 1962, pp. 156, 427). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
American Warehouse & Moving Service of Atlanta, Inc. v. Floyd's Diesel Service, Inc.
green
2 sentences1984This court has held, in American Warehouse &c. of Atlanta v. Floyd’s Diesel Service, 164 Ga. App. 106 ( 296 SE2d 64 ), where the defendant “undertook the rebuilding of appellant’s diesel engine” (which correctly summarizes the facts of the instant case), that “the warranty provisions of Code Ann. § 109A-2—314) [now OCGA § 11-2-314] are applicable ‘only to the sale of goods, and not services . . .’” Accord Pepsico Truck Rental v. Eastern Foods, 145 Ga. App. 410, 412 ( 243 SE2d 662 ). 1984This court has held, in American Warehouse &c. of Atlanta v. Floyd’s Diesel Service, 164 Ga. App. 106 ( 296 SE2d 64 ), where the defendant “undertook the rebuilding of appellant’s diesel engine” (which correctly summarizes the facts of the instant case), that “the warranty provisions of Code Ann. § 109A-2—314) [now OCGA § 11-2-314] are applicable ‘only to the sale of goods, and not services . . .’” Accord Pepsico Truck Rental v. Eastern Foods, 145 Ga. App. 410, 412 ( 243 SE2d 662 ). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Tubin v. Rabin
green
1 sentence1978NBG could not escape its duty of inquiry by relying on the word of its customer, UAS, Tubin v. Rabin, supra; nor does the fact that NBG could proceed against its customer under the warranty provisions of Ga. Code §§ 109A-3 — 417 and 109A-4 — 207 absolve it of the obligation of inquiry, Belmar Trucking Corp. v. American Trust Co., supra. "Therefore, failure to inquire into the validity of the indorsements in question precluded NBG from asserting the defense of commercial reasonableness of Ga. Code § 109A-3 — 419(3) as a matter of law.” III. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Myers v. Montgomery Ward & Co.
green
2 sentences1971In Myers v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 253 Md. 282 ( 252 A2d 855 ), it was held that an implied warranty on the sale of a rotary power mower was only that the *88 mower was fit to cut grass safely when it was used in a normal manner and not that the plaintiff, seeking to recover damages from the manufacturer and seller, would not be injured when he fell on a slope and his foot slipped under the mower. 1971In Myers v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 253 Md. 282 ( 252 A2d 855 ), it was held that an implied warranty on the sale of a rotary power mower was only that the *88 mower was fit to cut grass safely when it was used in a normal manner and not that the plaintiff, seeking to recover damages from the manufacturer and seller, would not be injured when he fell on a slope and his foot slipped under the mower. | 1 | 1971–1971 |