Branch v. Dublin & Laurens Bank
This text of 94 S.E. 629 (Branch v. Dublin & Laurens Bank) 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.
Opinion
1. A purchaser of a negotiable note, although with notice either express or constructive of equities and defenses as between the maker and the original payee, is protected in his title and may recover on it, if he purchased, even without recourse, from one who took it, bona fide and without notice, from the original payee. Civil Code (1910), §4535; Burch v. Pope, 114 Ga. 334 (40 S. E. 227); Weil v. Carswell, 119 Ga. 873 (47 S. E. 217); Wade v. Elliott, 11 Ga. App. 646 (75 S. E. 989); Day v. Rogers, 7 Ga. App. 535 (67 S. E. 279).
2. The court did not err in excluding the testimony complained of, or in 'thereafter directing a verdict for the plaintiff.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
94 S.E. 629, 21 Ga. App. 439, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 627, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/branch-v-dublin-laurens-bank-gactapp-1917.