Pittman v. Smith

107 S.E. 284, 26 Ga. App. 782, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 637
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMay 2, 1921
Docket12331
StatusPublished

This text of 107 S.E. 284 (Pittman v. Smith) 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
Pittman v. Smith, 107 S.E. 284, 26 Ga. App. 782, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 637 (Ga. Ct. App. 1921).

Opinion

Hill, J.

The undisputed evidence showing that the plaintiff was the bona fide holder, for value and before maturity, of the promissory note sued on, and, the verdict'for attorney’s fees being supported by the evidence, the motion for new trial was properly overruled. No error of law appears.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
107 S.E. 284, 26 Ga. App. 782, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 637, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pittman-v-smith-gactapp-1921.