Miller v. Slade & Farish

43 S.E. 69, 116 Ga. 772, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 254
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedDecember 12, 1902
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 43 S.E. 69 (Miller v. Slade & Farish) 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
Miller v. Slade & Farish, 43 S.E. 69, 116 Ga. 772, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 254 (Ga. 1902).

Opinion

Fish, J.

It was not erroneous to sustain a demurrer to a plea alleging that the promissory note sued on had been altered without defendant’s consent, when, even if the alleged alteration was in the note and material, there was no allegation that it was made with intent to defraud. Civil Code, §3702; Burch v. Pope, 114 Ga. 334.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring, except Lumpkin, P. J., absent.

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

Related

Anderson Banking Co. v. Chandler
107 S.E. 60 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1921)
Morgan v. Nashville Grain Co.
77 S.E. 913 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
43 S.E. 69, 116 Ga. 772, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 254, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-slade-farish-ga-1902.