Adamson v. Reagin
This text of 86 S.E. 455 (Adamson v. Reagin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. Under the ruling of the Supreme Court in this ease (143 Ga. 306, 85 S. E. 965), in response to the certified question propounded by this court, the trial court properly permitted an attorney at law of the defendant, who did not live in the county in which the suit was pending, to make oath to a plea of non est factum to the best of his knowledge and belief, and therefore properly refused to strike [127]*127the plea as amended by the affidavit of the attorney of the non-resident defendant.
2. The permission to file a plea of non est factum verified only to the best of the affiant’s knowledge and belief allows “a defendant to come in and prove something himself;” but does not “cast the onus upon the plaintiff to establish the execution of his instrument.” Martin v. Lamb, 77 Ga. 252 (3), 256 (3 S. E. 10).
3. Though not free from minor errors, the charge of the court was very favorable to the plaintiff in error. The evidence authorized the verdict, and there is no substantial merit in any of the assignments of error.
Judgment affirmed on both bills of exceptions.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
86 S.E. 455, 17 Ga. App. 126, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adamson-v-reagin-gactapp-1915.