Jones v. Advance-Rumley Thrasher Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Jones v. Advance-Rumley Thrasher Co.

95 S.E. 378, 22 Ga. App. 58, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 145

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 14, 1918

Docket9422

StatusPublished

This text of 95 S.E. 378 (Jones v. Advance-Rumley Thrasher Co.) 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

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

Pincite

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