Blayton v. General Tire & Rubber Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Blayton v. General Tire & Rubber Co.

166 S.E.2d 648, 119 Ga. App. 212, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 1046

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 17, 1969

Docket44258

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 166 S.E.2d 648 (Blayton v. General Tire & Rubber Co.) 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

Blayton v. General Tire & Rubber Co., 166 S.E.2d 648, 119 Ga. App. 212, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 1046 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Felton, Chief Judge.

Where the pleadings and exhibits in this action on an alleged contract of guaranty show (1) that the defendant guarantor admitted the execution of the contract, (2) that the contract was based upon sufficient consideration • (see Woods v. Universal C. I. T. Credit Corp., 110 Ga. App. 394, 397 (7) (138 SE2d 593), and cit.), and (3) that the present action was brought after the plaintiff creditor had obtained a judgment and return of nulla bona against the principal, the defendant is liable as a matter of law on said contract whether it be construed as one of guaranty or surety-ship. Since no issue of fact was involved the court did not err in its judgment granting a summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff creditor.

Judgment affirmed.

Pannell and Quillian, JJ., concur.

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

Felton, Chief Judge.

Where the pleadings and exhibits in this action on an alleged contract of guaranty show (1) that the defendant guarantor admitted the execution of the contract, (2) that the contract was based upon sufficient consideration • (see Woods v. Universal C. I. T. Credit Corp., 110 Ga. App. 394, 397 (7) (138 SE2d 593), and cit.), and (3) that the present action was brought after the plaintiff creditor had obtained a judgment and return of nulla bona against the principal, the defendant is liable as a matter of law on said contract whether it be construed as one of guaranty or surety-ship. Since no issue of fact was involved the court did not err in its judgment granting a summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff creditor.

Judgment affirmed.

Pannell and Quillian, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

166 S.E.2d 648, 119 Ga. App. 212, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 1046, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blayton-v-general-tire-rubber-co-gactapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack