Legal Opinion · Dissent

Knight v. Forbes

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided July 15, 1920No. 10823Published

Action for money had and received; from city court of Valdosta— Judge Cranford. July 9, 1919.

1Dissent

Luke, J.,

dissenting. 1. This is the second appearance of this case in this court, and its nature is fully set forth in connection with the decision in 19 Ga. App. 320, where it was construed to be an action for money had and received. The 'averment that the plaintiff delivered to the defendant the sum of money sued for was established only by proof that, in lieu of the cash, the defendant 'accepted a due-bill which the plaintiff procured a third person to make, which the defendant promptly transferred for value, and which the maker satisfied prior to the origin of the plaintiff’s alleged…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Alexander v. CoyneSupreme Court of Georgia · 1915
  2. Lary v. HartSupreme Court of Georgia · 1853
  3. Barlow v. StalworthSupreme Court of Georgia · 1859
  4. Knight v. ForbesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917

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

Powered by the Exa API