Legal Opinion
Hamby v. Crisp
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided February 5, 1934No. 23272PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, P. J.
1. The notes sued on having been executed, and the alleged alteration having been done, prior to the enactment of the uniform negotiable-instruments law of August 18, 1924, the questions presented are to be determined by the law as it was prior to that date.
2. Where one signs his name on the back of a promissory note merely as an accommodation indorser, and has not undertaken as a "technical indorser” to assign the instrument to another, his status being that of a surety (Civil Code of 1910, § 3541), not only must the language on the face of the instrument expressly *419indicate that it is a…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Mobley v. LyonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1910
- Jones v. TeasleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1920
- Ridley v. HightowerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
- Baldwin Fertilizer Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- Cook v. ParksCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1933
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Jefferson Standard Life Insurance v. BentleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1937
- Worth v. WorthWyoming Supreme Court · 1935
- National Life & Accident Insurance v. HankersonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934
- Atlanta Laundries Inc. v. GoldbergCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1944
- Gibson v. GibsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.