Arnold v. Bostwick Banking Co.

179 S.E.2d 780, 123 Ga. App. 189, 1971 Ga. App. LEXIS 1153
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Arnold v. Bostwick Banking Co.. Read the opinion of the Court — 121 Ga. App. 131
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided January 13, 1971·No. 44972·Published

Opinion

Evans, Judge.

The Supreme Court in Bostwick Banking Co. v. Arnold, 227 Ga. 18, having reversed the judgment of this court in Arnold v. Bostwick Banking Co., 121 Ga. App. 131 (173 SE2d 236), wherein it was held that a jury might determine from the evidence submitted on summary judgment that the plaintiff had made material alterations in filling in the balance of the notes, as he was required to do in comgjeting the blanks in the same which could avoid the instrument under the Uniform Commercial Code (Code Ann. §§ 109A-3 — 306, 109A-3— 407; Ga. L. 1962, pp. 156, 255, 259), our judgment reversing the trial court is vacated and set aside. The ruling made by the Supreme Court is made the judgment here. Accordingly, the trial judge did not err in granting the motion for summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

Judgment affirmed.

Hall, P. J., and Deen, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Arnold v. Bostwick Banking Co., 179 S.E.2d 780, 123 Ga. App. 189, 1971 Ga. App. LEXIS 1153 (Ga. Ct. App. 1971).

179 S.E.2d 780 (Arnold v. Bostwick Banking Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Arnold v. Bostwick Banking Co.
173 S.E.2d 236 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1970)
Bostwick Banking Co. v. Arnold
178 S.E.2d 890 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1970)