Legal Opinion

Townsend v. Tattnall Bank

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 18, 1948No. 31891PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

1. There is no merit in an oral motion, in the nature of a general demurrer, to strike the whole of the answer of a defendant, if any part thereof raises issuable facts to be tried by a jury. See Hicks v. Hamilton, 3 Ga. App. 112(2) (59 S.E. 331); Tietjen v. Meldrim, 169 Ga. 678(1) (151 S.E. 349).

2. (a) The transfer of the capital stock of a corporation by signing the assignment and delivering the certificate of stock to another as a pledge to secure a debt, passes the title of said stock to the pledgee. See Code § 22-706; Scott v. Flint River Pecan Co., 159 Ga. 668 (2) (126 S.E. 769);…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Tietjen v. MeldrimSupreme Court of Georgia · 1930
  2. Bates-Farley Savings Bank v. DismukesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
  3. Georgia Casualty Co. v. McRitchieCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
  4. Peoples Bank v. Exchange BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  5. Bank of Culloden v. Bank of ForsythSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Thompson v. ReeseCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
  2. BEN HYMAN & CO., INC. v. SolowCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1960

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API