Hughes v. Neal Loan & Banking Co.

23 S.E. 823, 97 Ga. 383
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedDecember 2, 1895
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 23 S.E. 823 (Hughes v. Neal Loan & Banking 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.

Bluebook
Hughes v. Neal Loan & Banking Co., 23 S.E. 823, 97 Ga. 383 (Ga. 1895).

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

The evidence of the plaintiff herself showing affirmatively that, though she had never endorsed the government check payable to her order, she had ratified its unauthorized collection by accepting in settlement of her claim a part of the proceeds of the check and a promissory note, and that in so doing she acted with a full knowledge of all the material facts, the bank through which the collection of the check was negotiated was not liable to her, and the court was right in awarding a nonsuit. Judgment affirmed.

T. W. Latham and W. F. Candler, for plaintiff. Marshall J. Clarke, for defendant..

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

Related

Kelley v. Carolina Life Insurance
171 S.E. 847 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1933)
Miller v. Lake View State Bank
240 Ill. App. 395 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1926)
Roberts v. Bank of Eufaula
92 S.E. 1015 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
23 S.E. 823, 97 Ga. 383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hughes-v-neal-loan-banking-co-ga-1895.