Davis v. West & Co.
This text of 56 S.E. 403 (Davis v. West & Co.) 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.
Opinion
1. In a suit against an indorser on a bill of exchange, which had been discounted for him by W. J. West & Co., evidence that said West & Co. “were in the money-lending business, discounting notes, bills, etc.,” but did not receive deposits; that, “they had out a sign ‘W. J. West & Co., Bankers,’ and advertised as bankers, but were not chartered,” and that “the company was composed of W. J. West alone,” there being no evidence that said West & Co. performed any of the other functions of a bank than that indicated above, fails to show that West & Co. were a bank or banker’s office, within the meaning of the Civil Code, § 3688, which provides that “it shall not be necessai'y to protest in order to bind indorsers, except in the following cases, to wit: 1. When a paper is made payable on its face at a bank or banker’s office. 2. When it is discounted at a bank or banker’s office. 3. When it is left at a, bank or banker’s office for collection.” Way v. Butterworth, 106 Mass. 75; 108 Mass. 509; People v. Brewster, 4 Wend. (N. Y.) 498.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
56 S.E. 403, 127 Ga. 407, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 282, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-west-co-ga-1907.