Legal Opinion
Watson v. Planters & Citizens Bank
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided November 5, 1964No. 40805, 40806PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Russell, Judge.
It is contended by demurrers to the answer that the note which the plaintiffs originally gave the bank to cover their indebtedness is contradictory because the body recites that the total amount, composed of both principal and interest, is due October 1, 1960, while the entry on the top margin which recites the total interest discounted on the left side, with the statement “To pay $2,000 on or before March 24, 1960” on the right side is an ineffectual attempt to vary the terms of the instrument by a marginal notation. Prior to the Negotiable Instrument Law it was established…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- First National Bank of Jacksboro v. LasaterSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Sparhawk v. YerkesSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Etheridge Motors, Inc. v. HaynieCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
- King v. PateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1960
- Sale City Peanut & Milling Co. v. Planters & Citizens BankCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1963
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Ballenger Corp. v. Dresco Mechanical Contractors, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
- Santistevan v. Centinel Bank of TaosNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1980
- Santistevan v. Centinel Bank of TaosNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1980