Clements v. National Bank

61 S.E. 146, 4 Ga. App. 270, 1908 Ga. App. LEXIS 263
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided April 22, 1908·No. 970·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

1. A sued B, O, and D, as makers of a promissory note, also claiming attorneys’ fees, and alleging the statutory notice therefor. B answered, admitting the execution of the note as principal maker, with C and D as sureties, and his indebtedness for principal and interest, but denied the allegation of notice' of the claim for attorneys’ fees. C and D made no defense. Judgment was rendered by the court against B for principal and interest, and against C and D for principal, interest, and attorneys’ fees. Held, the judgment was erroneous as to the attorneys’ fees against O and D. If in fact they were all joint principals, they were equally liable.

% If C and D were sureties for B, no judgment could be lawfully rendered for a greater amount against the sureties than against the principal. The judgment for attorneys’ fees against O and D should be written off.

Affirmed, xoith direction.

Complaint, from city court of Nashville — Judge Peeples. December 10, 1907. Submitted February 25, Decided April 22, 1908. J. H. Powell, Watts Powell, for plaintiffs in error. R. D. Smith, R. S. Foy, contra.

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

Clements v. National Bank, 61 S.E. 146, 4 Ga. App. 270, 1908 Ga. App. LEXIS 263 (Ga. Ct. App. 1908).

61 S.E. 146 (Clements v. National Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McMillan v. Heard National Bank
91 S.E. 235 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)
Savannah Bank & Trust Co. v. Purvis
65 S.E. 35 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1909)
Medlock v. Wood
61 S.E. 516 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1908)