Berrien County Bank v. Alexander

110 S.E. 311, 28 Ga. App. 55, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 296
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided January 17, 1922·No. 12838·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

Where the superintendent of banks has taken possession of a bank under the provisions of article 7 of the act of 1919, approved August 16, 1919 (Ga. R. 1919, p. 154), and has given the required notice as to the presentation of claims against the bank as provided for in the act (art. 7, section 13), a suit cannot be brought against the bank upon any claim, unless the claim, with sworn proof thereof, has been filed with the superintendent of banks at the office of the bank and been rejected by him, and unless the suit be brought in the proper court of the county in which the bank is located, within 90 days after notice of the rejection of the claim has been served upon the claimant. Act of 1919, supra, article 7, sections 13 and 15.

When the above rulings are applied to the allegations of the petition in this ease, no cause of action is set forth, .and the court erred in overruling the demurrer.

■Judgment reversed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. Story & Story, for plaintiff: in error. J. A. Alexander, W. D. Buie, contra.

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

Berrien County Bank v. Alexander, 110 S.E. 311, 28 Ga. App. 55, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 296 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

110 S.E. 311 (Berrien County Bank v. Alexander) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Carusos v. Briarcliff Inc.
45 S.E.2d 802 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1947)
Cochrane v. Florida East Coast Railway Co.
145 So. 217 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1932)
Clarke v. Roosevelt Memorial Ass'n
140 S.E. 522 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1927)
Bybee v. D. W. Standrod & Co.
260 P. 157 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1927)