Vanzant, Jones & Co. v. Arnold, Hamilton & Johnson
Supreme Court of Georgia
Motion to reinstate a case, in Fannin Superior Court. Decision by Judge Rice, at the May Term, i860. The record in this case exhibits the following state, of facts, to wit: Davis & Campbell made two notes, dated the 18th of August, 1856, due six months after date, payable to the order of Vanzant & Jamerson, .for $447.25 each.
Read the full summary
Motion to reinstate a case, in Fannin Superior Court. Decision by Judge Rice, at the May Term, i860. The record in this case exhibits the following state, of facts, to wit: Davis & Campbell made two notes, dated the 18th of August, 1856, due six months after date, payable to the order of Vanzant & Jamerson, .for $447.25 each. On the 20th of October, 1856, Vanzant, Jones & Co. indorsed both of said notes in the following form: “For value received, we assign the within notes fe> Arnold, Johnson & Hamilton, and to H. E. Diblee & Co., waiving demand and notice, and guarantee the payment of the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Eyon, J.,
delivering the opinion.
1. As the case had gone off from the docket in the Court below, without a finding, by the jury, of the facts on which the defence rested, we do not think there was any error in the Court’s allowing the case to be reinstated — and as that is the whole of the judgment complained of, the judgment must be affirmed for that reason.
But as the merits of the defence have been argued as admitted facts, we have felt it to be our duty to pass upon the several questions made in the argument, and necessarily involved in the case.
It is insisted, first, by the…
2Cited by25 opinions
- Hendrix v. Bauhard Bros.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1912
- Pratt v. SloanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1930
- Sally v. Bank of UnionSupreme Court of Georgia · 1920
- Pattillo v. AlexanderSupreme Court of Georgia · 1895
- Dunham v. PetersonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1896
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.