Cary, Bangs & Woodward v. Edmondson
44 Ga. 651
Opinion
This case turns upon the non-residence of the plaintiff. We have decided in several cases that notes held by nonresidents of this State, not used here, but only here for collection, are not taxable by our laws. The proof here is that at the making of the note, and continuously since, the plaintiff, to whom the note is payable, has not resided in this State. This the judgment, under these rulings, made, doubtless, since this decision by Judge Harrell, must be reversed.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cary, Bangs & Woodward v. Edmondson, 44 Ga. 651 (Ga. 1872).
44 Ga. 651 (Cary, Bangs & Woodward v. Edmondson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Davis v. Penn Mutual Life Insurance
41 S.E.2d 406 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1947)
Davis v. Penn Mutual Life Insurance Co.
32 S.E.2d 180 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1944)
Davis v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.
26 S.E.2d 618 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1943)
National Mortgage Corp. v. Suttles
22 S.E.2d 386 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1942)
Suttles v. Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance
19 S.E.2d 396 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1942)
Suttles v. Associated Mortgage Companies
193 Ga. 78 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1941)
Columbus Mutual Life Insurance v. Gullatt
8 S.E.2d 38 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1940)
Armour Packing Co. v. Clark
52 S.E. 145 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1905)
Armour Packing Co. v. City Council
45 S.E. 424 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1903)