James v. Southern Electrical Works

34 S.E. 140, 108 Ga. 746, 1899 Ga. LEXIS 325
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJuly 27, 1899
StatusPublished

This text of 34 S.E. 140 (James v. Southern Electrical Works) 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
James v. Southern Electrical Works, 34 S.E. 140, 108 Ga. 746, 1899 Ga. LEXIS 325 (Ga. 1899).

Opinion

Simmons, C. J.

AVhen the maker and indorser oí a promissory note were sued thereon in a State court and thereafter the property of the maker passed into the hands of a receiver appointed by the United States circuit court, the payee of the note was under no obligation, upon the demand of the indorser, to file an intervention in the United States court, although by so doing he might have recovered the amount of his note from the assets of the maker; and a failure to do so will not relieve the indorser from liability on the note. Brown v. Flanders, 80 Ga. 209; Nance v. Winship Machine Co., 94 Ga. 649.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring. James excepted. J. S. James and Price Edwards, for plaintiff in error. Roberts & Hutcheson and Tompkins & Alston, contra.

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

Related

Brown v. Flanders Bros.
5 S.E. 92 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1888)
Nance v. Winship Machine Co.
21 S.E. 901 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1894)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
34 S.E. 140, 108 Ga. 746, 1899 Ga. LEXIS 325, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-v-southern-electrical-works-ga-1899.