Legal Opinion

Thompson v. Wright

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 27, 1935No. 24359PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.

Mrs. Thompson brought suit against Wright as administrator of the estate of Mrs. Cora Hendrix, deceased, to recover upon a note which had been executed by decedent to T. P. Hendrix. The note matured January 1, 1926, and was transferred *818after maturity to the plaintiff. There was an entry on it that it was for purchase-money for land designated. A defense interposed by the administrator was that the note, if made by his intestate, was void in that it was executed by her to her husband as a promise to pay the purchase-price of land sold by him to her, and that its execution had not been allowed…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Humphrey v. CopelandSupreme Court of Georgia · 1875
  2. Georgia Casualty Co. v. McRitchieCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
  3. Hawes v. GlovesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
  4. Munroe v. BaldwinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1916
  5. Morris v. Murphey & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1895

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Thompson v. WrightSupreme Court of Georgia · 1936
  2. Thompson v. WrightCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API