Legal Opinion
Northside Building & Investment Co. v. Finance Co. of America
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided February 3, 1969No. 43891PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Quillian, Judge.
There are two basic issues to be resolved. (1) Was the Finance Company a holder in due course? For if so, the defense of payment raised by the defendant would be effectively negated unless the plaintiff had notice of the payment within the meaning of Code Ann. § 109A-3—602 (Ga. L. 1962, pp. 156, 277). (2) If the plaintiff were not a holder in due course, would he be entitled to invoke Code § 4-308, which provides: “Where money is due on a written evidence of debt, payment to an agent of the creditor who fails to produce the obligation shall be at the risk of the debtor.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Bank of the University v. TuckSupreme Court of Georgia · 1895
- Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1878
- Archibald Hardware Co. v. GiffordCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
- Bank of the University v. TuckSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
- Howard & Soule v. RiceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1875
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- United Overseas Bank v. Veneers, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 1974
- Security Pacific National Bank v. ChessCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- Third Nat. Bk., Nashville v. Hardi-Gardens Sup. of Ill., Inc.District Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1974
- Seamans v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977
- Cruz Reyes v. MartinezTribunal De Apelaciones De Puerto Rico/Court of Appeals of Puerto Rico · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.