Legal Opinion

Morgan v. Cedar Rapids National Bank

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided May 12, 1910No. 2253PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Complaint; from city court of Bainbridge- — -Judge Harrell. September 21, 1909. i

1Opinion of the Court

Hill, O. J.

1. The holder of a negotiable note is presumed to be such bona fide and for value. Civil Code, § 3696. If this presumption stood alone, there were some circumstances from which the jury might have inferred a rebuttal; but the undisputed evidence of the payee of the note and of the holder thereof proved that the latter was a bona fide purchaser for value and before maturity; and therefore, as against the holder, the maker could not plead failure of consideration, and the court did not err in directing a verdict for the plaintiff. Civil Code, *700§3694; Wilson v. Carter, 4 Ga. App. 350…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Harrell v. National Bank of CommerceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
  2. Wilson v. CarterCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Butler v. First National BankCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1913

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API