Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Barrow v. Blasingame

Barrow v. Blasingame

57 S.E. 926, 1 Ga. App. 358, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 243
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 2, 1907
Docket152
StatusPublished

This text of 57 S.E. 926 (Barrow v. Blasingame) 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.

Bluebook
Barrow v. Blasingame, 57 S.E. 926, 1 Ga. App. 358, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 243 (Ga. Ct. App. 1907).

Opinion

Powell, J.

1. A promissory note must contain words of negotiability, in order to entitle tlie transferee thereof to the rights accorded by the law to bona Me purchasers of negotiable paper. Reed v. Murphy, 1 Ga. 236; Cohen v. Prater, 56 Ga. 204; Third National Bank v. W. & A. R. Co., 114 Ga. 890.

2. As to its other substantial features, this ease is controlled by the decision of the Supreme Court in Jones v. Gilbert, 93 Ga. 604.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Reed ex rel. Holley v. Murphy
1 Ga. 236 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1846)
Jones v. Gilbert
20 S.E. 48 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1894)
Third National Bank v. Western & Atlantic Railroad
40 S.E. 1016 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1902)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 S.E. 926, 1 Ga. App. 358, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 243, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barrow-v-blasingame-gactapp-1907.