Clayton State Bank v. Goldesberry

This action was instituted by the Clayton State Bank, hereinafter referred to as plaintiff, against James Goldesberry and Bailey E. Bell, hereinafter referred to as defendant, to recover balance due on a promissory note alleged to have been executed by the defendants as comakers.

The defendant Bailey E. Bell defended with a plea of non est factum and payment, and defendant John Goldes-berry filed no pleading.

Trial was had to a jury. James Goldesberry testified that he and the defendant Bailey E. Bell had executed the note in controversy, and that no payments had been made thereon except those…