Cauthen v. Central Georgia Bank

69 Ga. 733
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedNovember 21, 1882
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 69 Ga. 733 (Cauthen v. Central Georgia Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cauthen v. Central Georgia Bank, 69 Ga. 733 (Ga. 1882).

Opinion

Crawford, Justice.

[The Central Georgia Bank brought suit on a promissory note against Thos. L. Cauthen, as principal, and' John Cauthen and A. Stafford, as endorsers. John Cauthen pleaded, among other things, that he was a mere co-security with Stafford, and offered to contribute one-half towards the payment of the debt. Stafford, on the other hand, pleaded that John Cauthen was really a co-principal with Thos, L. Cauthen, and that he (Stafford) alone signed as security. On the trial, evidence was introduced in support of these pleas, which was very conflicting. The judge, to whom the case was submitted without a jury, [734]*734held T. L. and John Cauthen liable as principals and Stafford as endorser, and entered judgment In favor of plaintiff accordingly. This formed one ground of exception.

This case, standing for trial at the regular term of Pike superior court, was, by consent order, set for hearing before the presiding judge at Griffin, Spalding county, at a given time. At that place, on May 3, 1882, an order was passed continuing the hearing until the 19th of that month, or such other time as might be agreed upon by the parties and approved by the court, and again naming Griffin as the place of hearing. On the 19th of May, the judge appeared at Barnesville, Pike county, called the case for trial, overruled objections thereto, and proceeded to try the case. Error was assigned upon this ruling.

The note in suit provided that, if not paid at maturity, it should bear twelve per cent, interest. It was dated in 1879. The court rendered judgment for interest at that per cent.]

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

Related

Talley v. Mathis
453 S.E.2d 704 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1995)
Chilivis v. ROGERS OIL COMPANY
217 S.E.2d 179 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1975)
Lawrimore v. Sun Finance Co.
205 S.E.2d 110 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)
Hartsfield Co. v. Demos
162 S.E. 138 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1931)
Union Estates Co. v. . Adlon Construction Co.
116 N.E. 984 (New York Court of Appeals, 1917)
Bishop v. Georgia National Bank
78 S.E. 947 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1913)
Central Bank & Trust Corp. v. State
76 S.E. 587 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1912)
James v. Calder
67 S.E. 1125 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1910)
Livingston Bros. v. Salter
65 S.E. 60 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1909)
Shank v. Washington Exchange Bank
52 S.E. 621 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1905)
Daniel v. Gibson
72 Ga. 367 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1884)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
69 Ga. 733, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cauthen-v-central-georgia-bank-ga-1882.