McGregor v. Matthis

32 Ga. 417
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided March 15, 1861·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

[418] By the Court.

Lumpkin, J.,

delivering the opinion.

From the time that Crumpton transferred the note to Fi.eld and Lemon, he ceased to have any interest in the land, (Tompkins vs. Williams, 19th Ga. Reports, 569,) and the deed being executed to Shelton afterwards, can make no difference. In the case of Ware ?against Jackson, (19th Georgia Reports, 452,) one of the Court who gave the majority opinion in that case, said, “ Had the note been transferred by Baker, (the vendor,) for a valuable consideration, to a bona fide holder, the case would have been different.” Indeed, in the case supposed, the Court would doubtless have been concurrent. That is this case'.

Let the judgment be affirmed.

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

McGregor v. Matthis, 32 Ga. 417 (Ga. 1861).

32 Ga. 417 (McGregor v. Matthis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stecker v. Snyder
193 P.2d 881 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1948)
Gholston Bros. v. Northeastern Banking Co.
123 S.E. 111 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1924)
Lumpkin v. Greenlea
78 S.E. 1003 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1913)
Gould v. Bank of Statesboro
31 S.E. 548 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1898)
Cade v. Jenkins
15 S.E. 292 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1892)
Thomas v. American Freehold Land & Mortgage Co. of London, Ltd.
47 F. 550 (U.S. Circuit Court for the Southern District of Georgia, 1891)
Neal v. Murphey & Co.
60 Ga. 388 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1878)