Branch v. Dublin & Laurens Bank

94 S.E. 629, 21 Ga. App. 439, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 627
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedDecember 14, 1917
Docket8626
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

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.

Bluebook
Branch v. Dublin & Laurens Bank, 94 S.E. 629, 21 Ga. App. 439, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 627 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

Opinion

Jenkins, J.

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.

Wade, C. J., and Luhe, J., concur.

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

Related

Houston v. Lundy
163 S.E. 328 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1932)
Luke v. Bank
151 S.E. 562 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1930)
North Georgia Trust & Banking Co. v. Hulme
134 S.E. 200 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1926)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
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.