Legal Opinion

Cook v. Griffin

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 3, 1939No. 27173PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, C. J.

1. “The holder, as the transferee, of a negotiable promissory note, is presumably a holder in due course. In a suit thereon by him against the maker, where the defendant pleads that the plaintiff is not a holder in due course, the burden is upon the defendant to establish this allegation in the plea.” Cairo Banking Co. v. Hall, 42 Ca. App. 785 (2) (157 S. E. 346); Code, § 14-509.

2. “A bill or note indorsed in blank is' transferable by delivery, and the indorsement, so long as it continues in blank, makes the bill or note in effect payable to bearer. Possession of such a negotiable instrument…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Nisbet v. LawsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1846
  2. Culpepper v. CulpepperCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1916
  3. Cairo Banking Co. v. HallCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1931
  4. Edwards v. CampCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
  5. South & Lane v. People's National BankCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Leathers v. TurnerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1947
  2. Evans v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1948

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

Powered by the Exa API