*1 (cid:127) .requirement give im would be and such impossible, Ga. 551, punity State, 571; Jackson v. Lewis v. crime.” State, Ordinarily, S. E. description the-.money, it not be is sufficient n sufficient as county to the checks here, the' vouchers., never may having fund, precise -description received the more itself is limit its fund so described as.to available, component parts a-single-.transaction and no other.. Accord ingly, these demurrers are without merit. -allegation “a ordinary court of- court
competent jurisdiction-in refer matters”, context traffic, vague ences to violations, is it indefinite,-nor demurrable ground the indictment does specify the alleged violator has traffic trial. jury waived-a jurisdiction court has matter involved and jurisdiction to receive bond under the alleged. oircumstances n The remaining general special demurrers are also without . merit. The trial err court in overruling did -the demurrers indictment. ...
Judgment Frankum and Jordan, JJ., concur: affirmed. 38598. FRIEDSAM v. SAWAN, INC.
Decided April 13, 1961.
:501 *2 A. C. III, D. Wells, plaintiff’in error. Warner Blanks, W. F. contra. Judge. 1. The petition as finally
Nichols, amended- following: material parts, “1. -A. That' said Hv leged, resident, Friedsam a County, Georgia, of Macon and is indebted your petitioner (cid:127).to in sum of $3,000; plus interest rate at the annum after February 2, -1959, on-a certain copy of which is attached hereto and made- by hereof-, reason of facts hereinafter recited. prior-to -That- ,said execution of contract, defendant plaintiff’s agent; K. R. Vance, examined be by, seed the contract, defendant’s .possession, which had-been harvested, , which were stored a building bulk located defendant’s attached, farm. Said to-.the -as A, Exhibit was executed defendant and.K. R. acting.as plaintiff’s Vance, .agent, after examining the seed shown to said -K. R. Vance defendant, and the- executed pertained to all. the seed which were then stored in building defendant’s and which had been exhibited by defendant to the said K. R. Vance, .and which were, estimated-by defendant- weigh 20,000. .between .and when .-pounds, properly cleaned. 2. That'under said contract, agreed defendant to- sell -plaintiff approximately $20 .bags-of .200.to 300 Bahia Pensacola per(cid:127) .at hundred .weight, F.'O-B. Mr.- -farm, which is Friedsam.’s located .-about three miles south -of. in Macon' County, Georgia. Marshallvi-lle, there of the execution That was at time of said con general growing, universal custom
tract trade seed, seed, including buying selling grass Bahia 100-pound packed that such bags, Bahia seed be plaintiff’s agent, known defendant and in contemplation R. of and Yance, K. executed the pursuant plaintiff’s agent, to- said Both custom. delivery R. understood contract called for Vance, agreed seed shown to said agent, cleaned would than less 200' more than 300 weight seed, pounds. with each February 2, 1959, compliance (February plaintiff’s truck, said contract 1st Sunday), driven accompanied by plaintiff’s O. J. Bunn and E. R. agent, Vance, Mr. accepting went to F'riedsam’s farm were advised that said seed had already sold. Said and there *3 fused make to the of seed described the contract has at all February times since failed to 1959, and refused 2, plaintiff deliver the to seed described in the contract. That after the examination of said contract and before the date set for delivery the defendant furnished a of said seed plaintiff to for testing, sample when satisfactory which tested was plaintiff to as to percentage gemination of purity and the of the contract. 4. Plaintiff shows the that under contract defendant -wasto at bags deliver to least 200 of Pensacola Bahia seed the price per to contract pound. Plaintiff 1959, further February 2, market the price of per pound, seeds making was a dif 350 ference per price of pound between and the 150 market price, per pound, plaintiff which amount of 150 profited. bags have shows each of the 200 of a total weighed pounds, making of have pounds to have of delivered should per pounds under the of Figuring 20,000 contract. seed at amount $3,000, plain in which pound, makes the total sum of sought damaged tiff in this has been of possession seed in of de Plaintiff shows action. when later building, bulk, in his fendant and stored 100-pound bags amounted bagged cleaned each. Plaintiff shows of many as to as February comply of defendant to on refusal failure and intentional contract, his an the terms of 2, with 1959, comply of the said defendant to on the arbitrary refusal to and the entitled said with the from interest at rate of annum recover of sum February $3,000, after the amount of Para damages by plaintiff.” of the sustained amount graphs designated “A”, letter added amendment. alleg copy of attached thereto petition had edly by the defendant. This contract called breached the purity sale 200 to 300 of Pensacola Bahia seeds of with germination better. ninety-five eighty-five or better and or made brief is that contention the defendant his petition, para allegations particularly of the to graph set a new of action seeks to forth because 3-A, original failed petition sought recover because to ninety-five better and purity deliver seed with the eighty-five better the failure to deliver with germination seeks to recover for regard satisfactory purchaser without purity quirement merit contract. Such is without contention provided “was sample, tested, the amendment germina (Italics ours). the terms tion under the contract.” This alle gation although geimination an that, w'as not were not in accordance de contract, the provision waives an fendant but was *4 that allegation the minimum met quirements to wit: under germination eighty-five purity ninety-five better, or better. most construing against petition strongly “Even a cannot be strained unreasonable construction pleader, placed testing its demurrer.” sufficiency against on an a App. (100 Ga. nes v. E. Jones, Rai S. 157). petition duty alleged The a a.breach thereof parties alleged
defendant. -It that the a entered into plaintiff sought to secure delivery of the the contract the defendant advised had him that he “ - ‘The already “sold” the seed. a imports word .“sold” proposition to a sell, mere- consummated contract of sale.’ 4 Words & Phrases (2d), 611.” v. Co.,& Neuhoff Swift (188 831). App. “A 651, 656 S. up of action is made a namely duty two elements': breach of it-.” Bell v. petition Ga. S. E. 2d Fitz, The leged a-valid contract-and a breach thereof judgment and was trial demurrer.- court overruling the defendant’s must demurrers be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed,. J., Felton, concurs-. Bell, C.J., concurs specially concurring specially. Chief Judge, Construing the petition against to the most strongly plaintiff on
demurrer-, very I am- doubtful whether the amendment should be construed as the'majority has construed it.- alleges the sample, “when tested was satisfactory to as' germination, stated, the contract.”- If met requirements .the seed contract it any make whether difference not.-- majority Since the rul ing accomplishes the same as would ruling to the effect requirement that a'waiver of -specified in. the contract would cure that it alleged defect was not met- requirements the contract, of' and .since the will have prove as a prerequisite to case this the seed met the requirements stated -inthe contract, I concur in placed construction- by the majority on the amendment to n . petition. .......