Moore v. Sims

• Decision Date: 20 October 1919
• Docket Number: 10416.
• Citation: 100 S.E. 647,24 Ga.App. 296
• Parties: MOORE v. SIMS.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

100 S.E. 647

24 Ga.App. 296

MOORE v. SIMS.

No. 10416.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Second Division

October 20, 1919

Syllabus by the Court.

The mere fact that a wife may be the owner of one or more cows which feed upon provender furnished solely upon the credit of her husband, will not render her liable for the value of such foodstuff, nor authorize a judgment against her for the same on the theory that she was the concealed principal of her husband, when there is no evidence that he was in any way acting as her agent when the purchase was made. See Hightower v. Walker, 97 Ga. 748, 25 S.E. 386; Montgomery v. Walton, 111 Ga. 840, 36 S.E. 202; Blount & Morel v. Dugger, 115 Ga. 109, 41 S.E. 270; Cornelia Planing Mill Co. v. Wilcox, 129 Ga. 522, 59 S.E. 223.

There being no evidence to authorize the verdict in favor of the plaintiff, and the case being remanded solely for this reason, it is unnecessary to pass upon the errors alleged in the amendment to the motion for a new trial, for, if such errors were committed, they will probably not occur on another trial.

Error from Superior Court, Barrow County; A. J. Cobb, Judge.

Suit by F. L. Sims against Adeline Moore. Judgment for plaintiff motion for new trial overruled, and defendant brings error. Reversed.

Joseph D. Quillian, of Winder, for plaintiff in error.

R. H Kimball, of Winder, for defendant in error.

SMITH J.

This is a suit against a wife as the undisclosed principal of her husband. The issue of fact involved in this case is whether or not the husband purchased certain cow food on his own account or as agent for his wife. The verdict of the jury being adverse to the defendant, she made a motion for a new trial, which was overruled, and she excepted.

The plaintiff testified that the defendant owed him $61.75 on a just, due, and unpaid account; that the account represented foodstuff which the defendant's cows ate; that the defendant and her husband lived on his place, and that when they came there the cows were so thin they could hardly walk that the cows used his pasture, and Dick Moore, the defendant's husband, bought the foodstuff from him, which was fed to the cows; that the defendant told him that the cows did not belong to either her or her husband. On cross-examination the witness testified that he did not sell the food in question to the defendant, but that he sold it to her husband, and booked it to him; that the defendant "never...