Hunter v. Teasley

19 Ga. App. 335
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJuly 1, 1916
Docket8087
StatusPublished

This text of 19 Ga. App. 335 (Hunter v. Teasley) 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
Hunter v. Teasley, 19 Ga. App. 335 (Ga. Ct. App. 1916).

Opinion

Wade, C. J.

1. The court did not err in excluding testimony offered to show that the nóte sued upon was obtained by fraud, since this testimony did not connect or tend to connect the holder of the note with the alleged fraud. The proof offered as to circumstances attending the execution of the note did not tend to throw light on the question as to whether the holder knew at the time he acquired the note that it was without consideration. Roberson v. First National Bank, 18 Ga. App. 171 (88 S. E. 991), and citations.

2. There was no error in directing a verdict in favor of the plaintiff.

Judgment affirmed.

George and Luke, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Roberson v. First National Bank
88 S.E. 991 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1916)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 Ga. App. 335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunter-v-teasley-gactapp-1916.