Legal Opinion
Haymans v. Bennett
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided December 12, 1922No. 13806PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBloodworth, J.
“An extension of time by a creditor to his principal debtor is a sufficient consideration to support the indorsement of a note renewing the original debt. The court committed no error in striking defendant’s pleas and in directing a verdict against him.” Hollingshead v. American National Bank, 104 Ga. 250 (2) (30 S. E. 728). “The extension granted by the creditor in taking the joint promissory note of the defendants for the antecedent debt of one of them was sufficient consideration to support the promise of the other.” Jones v. Southern Mortgage Co., 23 Ga. App. 567 (99 S. E. 42). “An…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Johnson v. CobbSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
- Swindell & Co. v. Bainbridge State BankCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
- Crooker v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
- Thompson v. McKeeSupreme Court Of The Territory Of Dakota · 1888
- Smith v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1912
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Franklin Savings & Loan Co. v. BrananCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936
- Nalley Land & Investment Co. v. Merchants & Planters BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1938
- Gibson v. First National BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1924
- Jordan Realty Co. v. Chambers Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1933
- Jennings v. PowellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1938
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.