Willingham Sash & Door Co. v. Drew

Decision Date27 June 1903
Citation45 S.E. 237,117 Ga. 850
PartiesWILLINGHAM SASH & DOOR CO. v. DREW.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court.

1. Where one undertakes to perform for another service or labor for a given sum, any amount paid in excess of that sum, not based upon a new consideration, is a mere gratuity.

2. A. employed B. to build a house for the sum of $1,400. A. paid the $1,400 before the completion of the house, and, it becoming apparent that B. would be unable to comply with the contract without suffering loss, B. was told by A. to estimate what sum would be necessary to complete the building, and, upon being informed that $350 would be required, B. was told to complete the building, and this amount would be paid in addition. Under this latter arrangement, B. was to do only what was contemplated by the original contract. After the $1,400 had been paid, and before the payment of the $350, A. was served with a summons of garnishment in a suit against B., and judgment was rendered in favor of the garnishee. Held (1) that the agreement to pay the additional sum of $350 was a nudum pactum, and (2) that at the time of the service of the summons of garnishment the relation of debtor and creditor did not exist between A. and B.

Error from Superior Court, Irwin County; D. M. Roberts, Judge.

Action by the Willingham Sash & Door Company against H. C. Drew. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error. Affirmed.

L. Kennedy, Hal Lawson, and Eldridge Cutts, for plaintiff in error.

D. B. Jay, for defendant in error.

COBB, J.

The facts of this case sufficiently appear from the second headnote. The case is controlled by the principle laid down in the case of Davis & Co. v. Morgan, 117 Ga. 505, 43 S.E. 732.

Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Wimberly v. Tanner
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • September 9, 1925
    ...issue in dispute was as to the amount of the attorney's fee. This case is distinguishable from such cases as Willing-ham Sash & Door Co. v. Drew, 117 Ga. 850 (1), 45 S. E. 237. 4. Applying these rulings, the court did not err in overruling the attorney's motion for a new trial. Judgement af......
  • Wimberly v. Tanner
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • September 9, 1925
    ... ... This case is ... distinguishable from such cases as Willingham Sash & Door ... Co. v. Drew, 117 Ga. 850 (1), 45 S.E. 237 ... ...
  • Moore v. Deal
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • September 26, 1947
    ... ... 504, 43 S.E ... 732, 61 L.R.A. 148, 97 Am.St.Rep. 171; Willingham Sash & ... Door Co. v. Drew, 117 Ga. 850, 45 S.E. 237; Hall v ... ...
  • Chambers v. W. L. Florence Const. Co.
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • November 16, 1945
    ... ... The Supreme Court ... said in the case of Willingham Sash & Door Co. v. Drew, ... 117 Ga. 850(1), 45 S.E. 237: 'Where one ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT