Legal Opinion

Roth v. Donnelly Grocery Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided January 24, 1911No. 2588PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Complaint; from city court of Atlanta — Judge Reid. March 18, 1910.

1Opinion of the CourtRowell, J.

1. A promissory note payable to order, but with a blank for the name of the payee, is valid, and any bona fide holder may,fill the blank with his own name as payee. Moody v. Threlkeld, 13 Ga. 55 (3). Hence, a plea to a suit on a promissory note, alleging that it was issued in blank and that the payee had filled the blank with his own name, does not allege a material alteration of the note, and does not constitute an issuable defense

2. A plea or answer to a suit on a promissory note, which alleges fraudulent conduct of a person other than the payee or some-other person in privity with him,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Moody v. ThrelkeldSupreme Court of Georgia · 1853

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Pryor v. American Trust & Banking Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1915
  2. Utah State National Bank v. StringerIdaho Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Savannah Bank & Trust Co. v. GrooverCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1937
  4. Williams v. GarrettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1924
  5. Reliance Fertilizer Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of Florida · 1935

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

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

Powered by the Exa API