lawskills
Google
search the Web search LawSkills.com
Did you know you can download our entire database for free?


Resources
[more] 

Georgia Caselaw:
Browse
Greatest Hits

Georgia Code: Browse

(external) Findlaw Georgia Law Resources


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Lawskills.com Georgia Caselaw
ARROW DYEING & FINISHING COMPANY, INC. v. CLARKLIFT OF DALTON, INC.
57161.
BELL, Chief Judge.
Action on account. Whitfield Superior Court. Before Judge Vining.
This is a suit on account in which plaintiff alleged an indebtedness of $7,580.98. At the close of all the evidence defendant moved for a partial directed verdict which was denied. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff in the amount of $7,000 and judgment was entered for that amount. Held:
The only error enumerated is the correctness of the denial of the motion for partial directed verdict. The ground of the motion was that there was no evidence of a written assignment to plaintiff of contracts for lease of equipment entered into between the assignor third party and defendant. These contracts formed a part of plaintiff's total claim. Contrary to this contention there was evidence showing an assignment of the contracts which consisted of testimony of witnesses concerning a "buyer-seller agreement." There was no valid objection made to this testimony. While there are cases holding an assignment of a chose in action must be in writing (see annotations, Code Ann. 85-1803), the evidence here does not demand a finding that the assignment was a parol agreement. CPA 50 (a) (Code Ann. 81A-150 (a)). Therefore, the court did not err in denying the motion for partial directed verdict.
Cotton, Katz, White & Palmer, William H. Willson, Jr., for appellee.
SUBMITTED JANUARY 4, 1979 -- DECIDED JANUARY 11, 1979.
Friday May 22 01:52 EDT


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Valid HTML 4.0!

Valid CSS!





Home - Tour - Disclaimer - Privacy - Contact Us
Copyright © 2000,2002,2004 Lawskills.com