Hunt v. Davenport

75 S.E. 644, 138 Ga. 622, 1912 Ga. LEXIS 637
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedAugust 19, 1912
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 75 S.E. 644 (Hunt v. Davenport) 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
Hunt v. Davenport, 75 S.E. 644, 138 Ga. 622, 1912 Ga. LEXIS 637 (Ga. 1912).

Opinion

Fish, C. J.

1. An amendment to an answer was properly disallowed which set up that the note, the foundation of the action, was void for the reason that it was given for a patent right, though- not expressing upon its face its consideration. Parr v. Erickson, 115 Ga. 873 (42 S. E. 240).

[623]*623August 19, 1912. Complaint. Before Judge Edwards. Haralson superior court. • July 20, 1911. James Beall and Buford F. Boylcin, for plaintiffs in error. Griffith & Matthews,' contra.

2. Under the evidence and the law applicable thereto, a verdict was demanded in behalf of the plaintiff, and the trial judge did not err in so directing. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Heard v. National Bank
84 S.E. 129 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1915)
Franklin v. Bank of Colbert
84 S.E. 131 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
75 S.E. 644, 138 Ga. 622, 1912 Ga. LEXIS 637, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunt-v-davenport-ga-1912.