Marable v. Mayer, Son & Co.
This text of 78 Ga. 60 (Marable v. Mayer, Son & Co.) 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.
Opinion
Marable, being indebted to Mayer, Son & Company by promissory note, executed a mortgage deed to a certain stock of goods, located in a certain house in the city of Rome, to secure the payment of said notes. This mortgage was foreclosed,' and Marable filed his affidavit of [61]*61illegality, whereby he claimed that there was no such stock of goods as the stock described in the mortgage when the same was executed, and that the mortgage was void because the same was witnessed by the attorney of Mayer, Son & Company, as a notary public. The jury found the issues formed on the affidavit of illegality in favor of Mayer, Son & Company. Marable moved for a new trial on several grounds, which'the court refused, and this refusal is assigned as error. This , is a correct statement of facts so far as we are enabled to ascertain them from the confused state of the record sent up in this case.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
78 Ga. 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marable-v-mayer-son-co-ga-1886.