Coursey v. Consolidated Naval Stores Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Action upon bond; from city court of Swainsboro—Judge Kirkland. August 28, 1917.
1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, J.
1. In a suit on a forthcoming bond given in a claim case, it is incumbent upon the plaintiff to show that the property has been found subject to the'execution, and either that a demand for the property has been made and refused, or that it was not produced at the time and place of sale as designated by the advertisement. Stinson v. Hall, 54 Ga. 676. Where the record, as in this case, fails to disclose any such demand, and proof of tlie advertisement has been excluded by the court, and there is no exception taken to this ruling, a breach of the obligation would ordinarily fail to appear. But…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Dixon v. Bristol Savings BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
- Haney School Furniture Co. v. Hightower Baptist InstituteSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
- Bank of Norwood v. ChapmanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
- Roberts v. Bank of EufaulaCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
- McKinnon & Eve v. HopeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Mendel v. Converse & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
- Medley v. Boomershine Pontiac-GMC Truck, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1994
- Glisson v. BurkhalterCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
- Wielgorecki v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
- Thompson v. Neely & WilcoxCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1924
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.