Brooks v. Ball, 122 S.E. 716 (Ga. Ct. App. 1924). · Go Syfert
Search
Brooks v. Ball, 122 S.E. 716 (Ga. Ct. App. 1924). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Brooks
v.
Ball
14969.
Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Apr 16, 1924.
122 S.E. 716
1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 248
Harrell & Ouster, for plaintiff in error. J. O. Hale, contra.
Bloodwortii.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
Bloodwortii, J.

1. The evidence failing to establish the fact that “Mr. Conger” was the agent of plaintiff, the court did not err in excluding the following evidence of Mrs. Brooks, the defendant: “I told Mr. Conger when I indorsed the note that I would not be responsible for the payment of it.”

2. The defendant having pleaded an affirmative defense and admitted a prima facie case and assumed the burden of proof, and having failed to establish her defense, the court did not err in directing a verdict for the plaintiff.

Judgment afjvrmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.