Park v. Chipstead
This text of 92 S.E. 350 (Park v. Chipstead) 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.
Opinion
There being no evidence in this case that the defendant ever delivered to the Bank of Blakely, or to D. W. James, president of the said bank or acting therefor, any cotton “under a sale to cover the overdrafts,” and no evidence to show that “the title to the cotton had passed to-the bank,” it was error, warranting a new trial, for the court to charge the jury as follows: “If you believe that the defendant did deliver to the Bank of Blakely, or to D. W. James, president of the [39]*39Bank of Blakely and acting for the bank, that cotton under a sale to cover the overdrafts, and that the bank held this cotton, and these overdrafts were made against it, and that the title to the cotton had passed into the bank, that it was the bank’s cotton at the time the overdrafts were made, or at any time prior to the time it went in the hands of the State bank examiner, and that that cotton at that time was of a sufficient value to cover, all told, the overdrafts, then you would find in favor of the defendant.”
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
92 S.E. 350, 20 Ga. App. 38, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 700, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/park-v-chipstead-gactapp-1917.