Sellers v. Wolverine Soap Co.

• Decision Date: 16 February 1917
• Docket Number: 7329.
• Citation: Sellers v. Wolverine Soap Co., 19 Ga.App. 295, 91 S.E. 489 (Ga. App. 1917)
• Parties: SELLERS ET AL. v. WOLVERINE SOAP CO.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

91 S.E. 489

19 Ga.App. 295

SELLERS ET AL. v. WOLVERINE SOAP CO.

No. 7329.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, First Division

February 16, 1917

Syllabus by the Court.

It does not appear in this case that the evidence introduced, with all reasonable deductions or inferences therefrom, demanded a particular verdict. The court therefore erred in directing the verdict returned. See Wolverine Soap Co. v. Sellers et al., 13 Ga.App. 380, 79 S.E. 246.

There is no provision of law requiring the record of a written instrument guaranteeing the performance of a contract for the services of a salesman. Such a paper is not a mortgage, or a conditional bill of sale, or an instrument of like character nor does it describe any property with sufficient certainty to constitute constructive notice, if recorded, as to the articles or goods sold or to be sold to the salesman. The execution of the instrument being admitted, the court did not err in receiving it in evidence.

The issues involved should have been submitted to a jury, and for that reason alone the judgment of the lower court is reversed.

Error from City Court of Cairo; W. J. Willie, Judge.

Action by Wolverine Soap Company against R. L. Sellers and others. Judgment for plaintiff on directed verdict, and defendants bring error. Reversed.

Jesse M. Sellers, of ...