Clark v. Toney

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Clark v. Toney

88 S.E. 690, 17 Ga. App. 803, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 938

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 17, 1916

Docket7063

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 88 S.E. 690 (Clark v. Toney) 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

Clark v. Toney, 88 S.E. 690, 17 Ga. App. 803, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 938 (Ga. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Wade, J.

1. “A promise by one person to indemnify another for becoming security to a third is not within the statute of frauds, and need not be in writing. And the promisee may recover of the promisor the whole of the moneys which he was compelled to pay by virtue of the bond into which he entered. The assumption of the responsibility is a sufficient consideration for the promise.” Jones v. Shorter, 1 Ga. 294. But if a person induced by such a promise of indemnity to sign a bond for the appearance of a third person voluntarily pays an amount to discharge his liability upon the bond before any such liability has been legally fixed thereon, he can not recover the sum so paid from the person by virtue of whose promise to indemnify he became surety on the bond.

2. The judge of the municipal court, sitting without a jury, did not err in rendering judgment in behalf of the defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

Russell, O. J., absent.

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

Wade, J.

1. “A promise by one person to indemnify another for becoming security to a third is not within the statute of frauds, and need not be in writing. And the promisee may recover of the promisor the whole of the moneys which he was compelled to pay by virtue of the bond into which he entered. The assumption of the responsibility is a sufficient consideration for the promise.” Jones v. Shorter, 1 Ga. 294. But if a person induced by such a promise of indemnity to sign a bond for the appearance of a third person voluntarily pays an amount to discharge his liability upon the bond before any such liability has been legally fixed thereon, he can not recover the sum so paid from the person by virtue of whose promise to indemnify he became surety on the bond.

2. The judge of the municipal court, sitting without a jury, did not err in rendering judgment in behalf of the defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

Russell, O. J., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

88 S.E. 690, 17 Ga. App. 803, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 938, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clark-v-toney-gactapp-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack