Jones v. Advance-Rumley Thrasher Co.

95 S.E. 378, 22 Ga. App. 58, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 145
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided March 14, 1918·No. 9422·Published

Opinion

Wade, C. J.

1. The holder of a note is presumed to be such bona fide and for value. Civil Code (1910), § 4288.

2. There is nothing in the record to rebut the legal presumption above referred to; and under the testimony adduced the court properly directed a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. See, in this connection, Edwards &c. Co. v. Vidalia Grocery Co., 144 Ga. 514 (87 S. E. 675, L. R. A. 1916D, 624).

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins and Luke, JJ., concur.

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

Jones v. Advance-Rumley Thrasher Co., 95 S.E. 378, 22 Ga. App. 58, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 145 (Ga. Ct. App. 1918).

95 S.E. 378 (Jones v. Advance-Rumley Thrasher Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Edwards & Deutsch Lithographing Co. v. Vidalia Grocery Co.
87 S.E. 675 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1916)