Case Name: Wagner & Son et al. v. Whitfield
Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1909-05-04
Citations: 6 Ga. App. 124
Docket Number: 1384
Parties: Wagner & Son et al. v. Whitfield.
Judges: 
Reporter: Georgia Appeals Reports
Volume: 6
Pages: 124–125

Head Matter:
1384.
Wagner & Son et al. v. Whitfield.
Action for damages, from city court of Cordele — Judge Strozier. July 30, 1908.
Submitted November 24, 1908. —
Decided May 4, 1909.
Whitfield sued for breach of contract. He alleged, that he entered into a contract with the defendants to paint the court-house which the defendants were constructing for Crisp County; that he was to be paid $450 for this work; that the defendants agreed to furnish him all of the materials to be used, at dealers’ prices, with the exception of 400 pounds of lead which they agreed to furnish him free of charge, and they also agreed to advance him sufficient money to pay his laborers at the end of each week; that he entered upon the performance of his contract, employed laborers, b.ought material, and carried on the work under the contract for thirty days or more, when the defendants violated the contract by stopping him from performing it, and refused to carry out their agreement to furnish money for his weekly pay-roll, or to pay for the material bought and used by him in doing the work; .and that by reason of the breach of their contract they damaged him in the sum of $250.93, this amount consisting of $55.35 which he had expended for material that went into the building, and of $195.58 paid by him to laborers for their work, under the contract. The defendants filed a plea of the general issue. The contract was admitted, and the fact that it was not- completed was also admitted. The evidence was in conflict only on the issue as to whether the plaintiff had voluntarily abandoned his contract, or whether the defendants, without cause, had prevented him from performance. The verdict was in favor of the plaintiff.

Opinion:
Hill, C. J.
No error of law appears. The conflict in the evidence was settled by the verd'iet, which the trial judge approved. This court will not interfere. Judgment affirmed.
J. T. Hill, for plaintiffs in error. Land & Hall, contra.