Green v. Taliaferro

95 S.E. 312, 22 Ga. App. 27, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 116
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 13, 1918
Docket9275
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 95 S.E. 312 (Green v. Taliaferro) 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
Green v. Taliaferro, 95 S.E. 312, 22 Ga. App. 27, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 116 (Ga. Ct. App. 1918).

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. Where in a forthcoming bond, executed, and delivered in a claim ease, it is provided that the principal and the sureties acknowledge themselves jointly and severally bound unto the levying officer, “in the sum of one hundred dollars, subject to the following conditions: if the said claimant shall deliver the property described in the foregoing affidavit, at the time and place of sale, then this bond to be void,” etc., the plaintiff in fl. fa., upon a breach of the .bond by the principal, can recover no more than the amount named in the bond, together with interest, even though the proof show that the property is of greater value than the sum' named in the bond and Of less value than the amount due on the fi. fa. Westbrook v. Moore, 59 Ga. 204; Jones v. Fayette Fertilizer Co., 141 Ga. 32 (80 S. E. 306).

2. The court did not err in granting a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, C. J., and Jenkins, J., concur.

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

Related

Cantrell v. National Surety Co.
167 S.E. 314 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1932)
Spires v. Spires
117 S.E. 255 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
95 S.E. 312, 22 Ga. App. 27, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/green-v-taliaferro-gactapp-1918.