Johnson v. Hall
Supreme Court of Georgia
Assumpsit, in Pike Superior Court, tried before Judge Floyd, March Term, 1848. This action was brought in the Court below, by the defendant in error, against the plaintiff in error, upon nine promissory notes, eight of which were for thirty dollars each, and one for six dollars and twenty-three cents, said notes, dated 21st March, 1840, and due the 9th September thereafter.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, in Pike Superior Court, tried before Judge Floyd, March Term, 1848. This action was brought in the Court below, by the defendant in error, against the plaintiff in error, upon nine promissory notes, eight of which were for thirty dollars each, and one for six dollars and twenty-three cents, said notes, dated 21st March, 1840, and due the 9th September thereafter. Instead of making .proferí of the notes, the first count specially alleged as follows: “ And your petitioner sheweth, that on the sixth day of March, in “the year eighteen hundred and forty-one, he placed said notes “ in…
1Opinion of the Court
*389 By the Court.
Warner, J.
delivering the opinion.
The Court below did not err, in our judgment, in overruling the defendant’s demurrer to the declaration, or in refusing to nonsuit the plaintiff, on the ground that the plaintiff’s demand, was barred by the Statute of Limitations, nor for admitting the testimony of Banks. The delaration is drawn, it is true, in quite an informal manner, but we think it is substantially an action of' assumpsit on the notes, and not an action on the case for fraud. The allegation, as to the manner in which the notes were paid to the magistrate, and the destruction…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Gholston v. O'KelleySupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
- Bryan v. Meaders Bros.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1911