Hames v. Hames

Supreme Court of Georgia

Hames v. Hames

140 S.E.2d 844, 220 Ga. 595, 1965 Ga. LEXIS 568

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided February 4, 1965·No. 22756·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Qtjillian, Justice.

The only question presented by the assignment of error in the present case is whether the Act of 1941, as amended (Ga. L. 1941, pp. 487-489; Ga. L. 1953, Nov. Sess., pp. 313, 314), embodied in Code Ann. § 67-1308, is applicable to a note and security deed given to secure the same where the note matured before the Act, according to its provisions, became effective as a statute of the State. This precise question is answered in the negative in the case of Todd v. Morgan, 215 Ga. 220, 221 (2) (109 SE2d 803). The Todd case is controlling here.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. Submitted January 11, 1965 Decided February 4, 1965. G. W. Langford, for plaintiff in error. Shaw, Stolz & Fletcher, contra.

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

Qtjillian, Justice.

The only question presented by the assignment of error in the present case is whether the Act of 1941, as amended (Ga. L. 1941, pp. 487-489; Ga. L. 1953, Nov. Sess., pp. 313, 314), embodied in Code Ann. § 67-1308, is applicable to a note and security deed given to secure the same where the note matured before the Act, according to its provisions, became effective as a statute of the State. This precise question is answered in the negative in the case of Todd v. Morgan, 215 Ga. 220, 221 (2) (109 SE2d 803). The Todd case is controlling here.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. Submitted January 11, 1965 Decided February 4, 1965. G. W. Langford, for plaintiff in error. Shaw, Stolz & Fletcher, contra.

Hames v. Hames, 140 S.E.2d 844, 220 Ga. 595, 1965 Ga. LEXIS 568 (Ga. 1965).

Pincite

140 S.E.2d 844 (Hames v. Hames) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related