Legal Opinion

Barton v. Scott Hudgens Realty & Mortgage, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided November 14, 1975No. 51231PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Deen, Presiding Judge.

Appellee relies upon Freezamatic Corp. v. Brigadier Industries Corp., 125 Ga. App. 767 (189 SE2d 108), wherein it was held that under our Uniform Commercial Code when execution of a promissory note is admitted but an affirmative defense is not raised, judgment on the pleadings in favor of the holder is proper. While it is true that Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 307 (2) provides for such a circumstance, what the appellee (and also the appellants) overlooked is that the provisions of Code Ann. Ch. 109A-3 apply only to negotiable instruments and the "promissory note” here in issue…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Freezamatic Corp. v. Brigadier Industries Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1972
  2. Geiger Finance Co. v. GrahamCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1971

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Khabbaz v. SwartzSupreme Court of Iowa · 1982
  2. Crolley v. Haygood Contracting, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1991
  3. Henry v. Cobb Bank & Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1979
  4. P P Inc. v. McGuireDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1981
  5. Walker v. MODNAR CORPORATIONCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1986

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