Legal Opinion

Proctor v. Royster Guano Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided January 22, 1918No. 8845PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Complaint; from city court of Millen — Judge Dekle. April 3, 1917.

1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, J.

1. “Blank indorsements of negotiable paper may always be explained between the parties themselves, or those taking with notice of dishonor or of the actual facts of such indorsements.” Civil Code (1910), § 5796.

2. Under the provisions of the code section quoted above, not only is it permissible for a technical indorser thus to show by parol that such indorsement was made solely for the purpose of passing title to the instrument (Bryan v. Windsor, 99 Ga. 176, 25 S. E. 268); but the right to explain by parol the real nature and intent of the contract as evidenced by a blank indorsement applies…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Crooker v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
  2. Atkinson v. BennetSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
  3. Mansfield v. BarberSupreme Court of Georgia · 1877
  4. Saussy & Huxford v. WeeksSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
  5. Bryan v. WindsorSupreme Court of Georgia · 1896

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Watkins v. WoodberyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1919
  2. Odom Realty Co. v. Central Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1918
  3. Jennings v. PowellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1938
  4. Johnson v. Bank of TallapoosaCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1924
  5. Burns v. Royster Guano Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1919

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

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

Powered by the Exa API