Savannah Bank & Trust Co. v. Hartridge
Supreme Court of Georgia
Principal and Agent. Banks. Notice. Contracts. Charge of Court. Verdict. Before Judge Harden. City-Court of Savannah. July Term, 1885. To the report contained in the decision, it is necessary to add only that the jury found for the plaintiff $3,565.62, principal (the suit being for $9,000.00, principal.) The plaintiff moved for a new trial, on the following among other grounds: (1.) Because the verdict was contrary to law and evidence.
Read the full summary
Principal and Agent. Banks. Notice. Contracts. Charge of Court. Verdict. Before Judge Harden. City-Court of Savannah. July Term, 1885. To the report contained in the decision, it is necessary to add only that the jury found for the plaintiff $3,565.62, principal (the suit being for $9,000.00, principal.) The plaintiff moved for a new trial, on the following among other grounds: (1.) Because the verdict was contrary to law and evidence. (2.) Because the court charged the jury as follows: “ Now as to the question of the difference in price—the third plea. This plea is based on the idea that the…
1Opinion of the Court
Blandeord, Justice.
Milo Hatch, the cashier of the plaintiff in error, entered into a contract with defendant in error whereby Hartridge was to purchase certain shares of the stock of the Central Railroad for Hatch. Hartridge was to give his note to the bank and to deposit the stock as collateral security for the payment of the same, and Hatch was to advance the money of the bank to Hartridge to pay for this stock. This contract was consummated between Hatch and Hart-ridge. This contract was contrary to the rules of the bank, which was known to both Hatch and Hartridge. This, then, amounted to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Savannah Bank & Trust Co. v. HartridgeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1884
3Cited by2 opinions
- Planters' Rice-Mill Co. v. Olmstead & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1887
- English v. Bank of the State of GeorgiaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1886