Legal Opinion

Thigpen v. Vidalia Chemical Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided January 19, 1931No. 20654PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.

1. The copy of the mortgage attached to the foreclosure affidavit was sufficiently verified to meet the requirements of the Civil Code, § 32-86, by the statement contained in the affidavit that the defendant was indebted to the plaintiff “on a certain mortgage a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part of the affidavit.” Bainbridge Stock Co. v. Krause-McFarlin Co., 8 Ga. App. 220 (2) (68 S. E. 1013) ; Hardy v. Luke, 18 Ga. App. 423 (89 S. E. 540).

2. Moreover, in Bosworth v. Matthews, 74 Ga. 822, the requirement as to annexing to the affidavit the mortgage or a copy thereof was held to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hardy v. LukeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1916
  2. Hillis v. Comer & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1913
  3. Bainbridge Stock Co. v. Kráuse-McFarlin Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1910
  4. Bosworth & Jossey v. MatthewsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1885

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Simpson v. JonesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1936
  2. Tatham v. LanierCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1941
  3. Little v. Peoples BankCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1940

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

Powered by the Exa API