Legal Opinion

Guggenheimer & Co. v. Gilmore

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 10, 1923No. 13657PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, P. J.

1. Although an instrument in the form of a guaranty does not indicate a meeting of the minds of the parties by virtue of any recital that it is made in accordance with the request of the 'party by whom the credit was to be extended, still, where the terms of the promise to pay are absolute, and notice of acceptance is expressly waived *541by the writing, no notice of acceptance to the guarantors by the guarantee is required in order to render the instrument binding, but actual acceptance manifested merely by extending the credit authorized by such direct and unconditional promise is sufficient to…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Manry v. Waxelbaum Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1899
  2. Sheffield v. WhitfieldCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1909
  3. Sheppard v. Daniel Miller Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1910
  4. Carson v. Hurst & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1912
  5. Weeks v. Reliance Fertilizer Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1917

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. KeatingSupreme Court of Georgia · 1933
  2. Fletcher v. C. W. Matthews Contracting Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2013
  3. Wehle v. BakerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1958
  4. Segal v. Carroll Furniture Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
  5. Bearden v. EBCAP SUPPLY COMPANYCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1963

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