McDonald v. Citizens Bank

Court of Appeals of Georgia

McDonald v. Citizens Bank

103 S.E. 851, 25 Ga. App. 609, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 100

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedAugust 13, 1920

Docket11179

StatusPublished

This text of 103 S.E. 851 (McDonald v. Citizens Bank) 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

McDonald v. Citizens Bank, 103 S.E. 851, 25 Ga. App. 609, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 100 (Ga. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

Jenkins, P. J.

1. If A, a married woman, with the knowledge and at the suggestion of B, signs a note as principal in favor of C, but without any consideration flowing to her, and with the understanding that B will indorse the note, it is competent for the married woman, in a contest relating solely to an adjudication of the relative rights of herself and B, to show this state of facts by parol, and to have her liability to an innocent purchaser of the note adjudged to be secondary to that of B. National Bcmh of Tifton v. Smith, 142 Ga. 663 (1) (83 S. E. 526, L. R. A. 1915B).

2. The evidence authorized the jury to find that the original transaction, of which the note sued on was a renewal, was in accordance with the foregoing statement.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

Jenkins, P. J.

1. If A, a married woman, with the knowledge and at the suggestion of B, signs a note as principal in favor of C, but without any consideration flowing to her, and with the understanding that B will indorse the note, it is competent for the married woman, in a contest relating solely to an adjudication of the relative rights of herself and B, to show this state of facts by parol, and to have her liability to an innocent purchaser of the note adjudged to be secondary to that of B. National Bcmh of Tifton v. Smith, 142 Ga. 663 (1) (83 S. E. 526, L. R. A. 1915B).

2. The evidence authorized the jury to find that the original transaction, of which the note sued on was a renewal, was in accordance with the foregoing statement.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 S.E. 851, 25 Ga. App. 609, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 100, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcdonald-v-citizens-bank-gactapp-1920.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack