112 Ga. App. 456 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1965
As a general rule a bailee is excused from returning the subject matter of the bailment where the goods are taken from him by authority of law and the bailee gives notice or the bailor has knowledge thereof, so that the bailor has an opportunity to litigate his right to the property. Witherington v. Laurens County Farmers Co-Op. &c. Co., 23 Ga. App. 307 (98 SE 228); Hancock v. Anchors, 26 Ga. App. 125 (105 SE 631); Jones v. Williams, 40 Ga. App. 819 (151 SE 695); 8 CJS 463, Bailments, § 37; 8 Am. Jur. 2d 1072, Bailments, § 187.
The controlling issue in this case is whether the evidence demanded a finding that the defendant gave notice to the plaintiff, through its agents, of the fact that the defendant was served by a United States deputy marshal on January 9, 1964, with the court proceedings for seizure and condemnation of the property, which gave notice of a hearing thereon in the United States District Court on February 7, 1964. For the defendant, Mrs. Mason testified that she was an officer of and owned an interest in the defendant company, and operated its business office. She testified that she was positive that she telephoned the Lanier Company (the plaintiff’s agent) on January 9, 1964, and notified it that the papers had been served; she talked with either Mr. Heard or Mr. Lanier—to the best of her recollection it was Mr. Heard. She testified that on February 19, 1964, when the goods were seized, she again called the Lanier Company and, the best she could recollect, talked with Mr. Lanier and told him that the goods were being picked up. Mr. Heard of the Lanier Company testified that the only conversation he had about this matter with Mrs. Mason was on February 19 and that he did not recall talking with her except on that date. Mr. Lanier did not testify. Mr. Fleard’s testimony contradicted Mrs. Mason’s testimony that to her best recollection she talked with
Judgment reversed.
