National Bank v. Cunningham
Supreme Court of Georgia
Cotton Futures. Contracts. Consideration. Public Policy. Promissory Notes. Evidence. Before Judge Roney. Richmond Superior Court. October Adjourned Term, 1884. Reported in the decision.
1Opinion of the Court
Blandford, Justice.
1, 2. When this case was before this court at September term, 1883, as found reported in 71 Ga., 400, it was then held that contracts for the purchase and sale of cotton futures are gaming contracts. They are immoral, illegal and contrary to public policy; and all evidences of debt executed on such consideration are void in the hands of any person, even though it be a bona fide purchaser before due and without notice. What was then held and decided we now adhere to.
The note in this case was given to Warren, Wallace & Company, who are the payees. The evidence shows that the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Irwin v. WilliarSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Cunningham v. National BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1883
- Warren, Lane & Co. v. HewittSupreme Court of Georgia · 1872
3Cited by16 opinions
- Clarke, Harrison & Co. v. BrownSupreme Court of Georgia · 1886
- Singleton v. Bank of MonticelloSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
- Weaver v. CarterSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
- Anderson & Co. v. HolbrookSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
- Cothran & Co. v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1889
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.