Farmers State Bank v. Rowland

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Farmers State Bank v. Rowland

84 S.E. 89, 15 Ga. App. 600, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 3

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 20, 1915

Docket5689

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 84 S.E. 89 (Farmers State Bank v. Rowland) 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

Farmers State Bank v. Rowland, 84 S.E. 89, 15 Ga. App. 600, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 3 (Ga. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Russell, C. J.

1. The consideration of the promissory note which was the basis of the suit was expressed therein as being the purchase-price of stock in an incorporated company known as the Southern Finance Corporation, and, under the act of the General Assembly approved August 17, 1912 (Acts of 1912, p. 154, sec. 2), the maker of the note was let in to all the equities existing between himself and the original payee. There was, therefore, no material error in any of the rulings upon the admissibility of testimony to which exception is taken.

2. The act of 1912 which requires the consideration of promissory notes given for certain stocks to be expressed in the face of the contract was enacted for reasons of sound public policy which would be absolutely defeated were the maker of a contract, involving the purchase of such stock as was within the scope of the legislative enactment, permitted to waive the legal consequences of the statute. [601]*6013. The verdict being supported by some evidence, the judgment of the trial judge, overruling the motion for new trial, will not be disturbed.

Decided January 20, 1915.

Complaint; from city court of Nashville—Judge Christian. April 13, 1914.

W. B. Smith, for plaintiff. W. D. Buie, for defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, J., not presiding.

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

Russell, C. J.

1. The consideration of the promissory note which was the basis of the suit was expressed therein as being the purchase-price of stock in an incorporated company known as the Southern Finance Corporation, and, under the act of the General Assembly approved August 17, 1912 (Acts of 1912, p. 154, sec. 2), the maker of the note was let in to all the equities existing between himself and the original payee. There was, therefore, no material error in any of the rulings upon the admissibility of testimony to which exception is taken.

2. The act of 1912 which requires the consideration of promissory notes given for certain stocks to be expressed in the face of the contract was enacted for reasons of sound public policy which would be absolutely defeated were the maker of a contract, involving the purchase of such stock as was within the scope of the legislative enactment, permitted to waive the legal consequences of the statute. [601]*6013. The verdict being supported by some evidence, the judgment of the trial judge, overruling the motion for new trial, will not be disturbed.

Decided January 20, 1915.

Complaint; from city court of Nashville—Judge Christian. April 13, 1914.

W. B. Smith, for plaintiff. W. D. Buie, for defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, J., not presiding.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 S.E. 89, 15 Ga. App. 600, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 3, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farmers-state-bank-v-rowland-gactapp-1915.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack