Blalock v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Blalock v. State

143 S.E. 795, 38 Ga. App. 231, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 152

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 12, 1928

Docket18679

StatusPublished

This text of 143 S.E. 795 (Blalock v. State) 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

Blalock v. State, 143 S.E. 795, 38 Ga. App. 231, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 152 (Ga. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

Questions certified by tbis court to tbe Supreme Court were answered by that court as follows: “Deposits of the public funds of the county of Eayette, in the Bank of Eayetteville, as ‘the depository and disbursing agent ’ of said funds under the act of 1915 (Acts 1915, p. 233), creating a depository and disbursing agent of the public funds of the county, were general deposits, title to which became vested in such bank upon being deposited; and neither the depository nor its officers can be indicted for embezzlement of such funds as the property of the county.”

Under the foregoing ruling the judge of the superior court erred in overruling the general demurrer to the indictment.

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Bloodworth, J.

Questions certified by tbis court to tbe Supreme Court were answered by that court as follows: “Deposits of the public funds of the county of Eayette, in the Bank of Eayetteville, as ‘the depository and disbursing agent ’ of said funds under the act of 1915 (Acts 1915, p. 233), creating a depository and disbursing agent of the public funds of the county, were general deposits, title to which became vested in such bank upon being deposited; and neither the depository nor its officers can be indicted for embezzlement of such funds as the property of the county.”

Under the foregoing ruling the judge of the superior court erred in overruling the general demurrer to the indictment.

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 S.E. 795, 38 Ga. App. 231, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 152, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blalock-v-state-gactapp-1928.