History
  • No items yet
midpage
Ragan v. Smith & Gordon
103 Ga. 556
Ga.
1897
Check Treatment
Lumpkin, P. J.

1. “A letter received in due course of mail in response to a letter sent by the receiver is presumed, in the absence of any showing to the contrary, to be the letter of the person whose name is signed to it.” Scofield v. Parlin & Orendorff Co., 61 Fed. Rep. 804. To the same effect, see, also, 2 Whart. Ev. § 1328; 1 Taylor, Ev. 183 49; 19 Am. & Eng. Enc. L. 52, referring to 13 Id. 260.

2. Accordingly, where on the trial of an action upon an open account the plaintiff relied upon admissions of its correctness contained in letters so received, written upon letter-heads of the defendant and purporting to have been signed by him, a prima facie case for a recovery was made out, and, in the absence of any counter-evidence on the part of the defendant, it was not erroneous to direct a verdict in the plaintiff’s favor.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring. Complaint on account. Before Judge Smith. Dodge superior court. March term, 1897. E. A. Smith, for plaintiff in error.

Case Details

Case Name: Ragan v. Smith & Gordon
Court Name: Supreme Court of Georgia
Date Published: Nov 30, 1897
Citation: 103 Ga. 556
Court Abbreviation: Ga.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.