Marable v. Mayer, Son & Co.

78 Ga. 60
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedDecember 21, 1886
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

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.

Bluebook
Marable v. Mayer, Son & Co., 78 Ga. 60 (Ga. 1886).

Opinion

Blandford, Justice.

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.

1. Marable, having by his mortgage set forth a certain stock of goods and located them in a certain house in the city of Rome, is estopped from denying the truth of the same by his deed, and this ground of the illegality was not good for this reason.

2. The mortgage deed, as between Marable and Mayer, Son & Co., was good without a witness; consequently there is nothing in this ground of the illegality.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Lewis v. Storch
169 S.E.2d 726 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1969)
Budget Charge Accounts, Inc. v. Peters
96 S.E.2d 887 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1957)
Thomas v. Hudson
10 S.E.2d 396 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1940)
Hawes v. Gloves
55 S.E. 62 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1906)
King v. Sears
18 S.E. 830 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1893)
Johnson v. Jones
13 S.E. 261 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1891)
Smith v. Camp
10 S.E. 539 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1889)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
78 Ga. 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marable-v-mayer-son-co-ga-1886.