History
  • No items yet
midpage
Parker v. Daniel
16 Ga. App. 23
| Ga. Ct. App. | 1915
|
Check Treatment
Russell, C. J.

There was circumstantial evidence which authorized the inference that the plaintiff acquired title to the note subsequently to its maturity, and that for that reason he was not a bona fide purchaser. The charge of the court was a full, fair and able presentation of the law applicable to the case, and, when considered as a whole, was not subject to any of the exceptions presented in the motion for a new trial. For that reason the verdict approved by the trial judge will not be disturbed. Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, J., not presiding. Complaint; from city court of Jefferson — Judge Johns. December 16, 1913. A. 0. Brown, John J. & Boy M. Strickland, for plaintiff. G. C. Thomas, T. J. Shackelford, W. M. Smith, P. Cooley, for defendant.

Case Details

Case Name: Parker v. Daniel
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Date Published: Feb 18, 1915
Citation: 16 Ga. App. 23
Docket Number: 5478
Court Abbreviation: Ga. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.