green
Positive treatment
6.9 score
Treatment trajectory · 1907 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1907
1966
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Rose v. Rollins
(2×)
As it is well established “[i]f a deed to real estate is signed and delivered to a depositary as an escrow, or to a special agent, with authority to deliver it to the grantee only upon a certain condition, a delivery to such grantee without the happening of such condition would not be lawful.” Anderson v. Goodwin, 125 Ga. 663, 664 (9) ( 54 SE 679 ) (1906); Mays v. Shields, 117 Ga. 814 ( 45 SE 68 ) (1903).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Regenstein v. J. Regenstein Co.
Co., 101 Ga. 741, 746 ( 28 S. E. 991 ); Miller v. Butler, 121 Ga. 758 (3) ( 49 S. E. 754 ); Anderson v. Goodwin, 125 Ga. 663, 669 ( 54 S. E. 679 ); Jones v. Robinson, 172 Ga. 746, 747 (3c) ( 158 S. E. 752 ); Robertson v. Pantos, 208 Ga. 116, 118 ( 65 S. E. 2d 400 ).” Rowland v. Rich’s, Inc., 212 Ga. 640, 641 ( 94 S. E. 2d 688 ).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Rowland v. Rich's, Inc.
Co., 101 Ga. 741, 746 ( 28 S. E. 991 ); Miller v. Butler, 121 Ga. 758 (3) ( 49 S. E. 754 ); Anderson v. Goodivin, 125 Ga. 663, 669 ( 54 S. E. 679 ); Jones v. Robinson, 172 Ga. 746, 747 (3c) ( 158 S. E. 752 ); Robertson v. Panlos, 208 Ga. 116, 118 ( 65 S. E. 2d 400 ). *642 In the present case no fraudulent acts or conduct of the defendant are alleged in procuring the execution of the note.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Moore v. Wells
Co., 101 Ga. 741, 746 ( 28 S. E. 991 ); Miller v. Butler, 121 Ga. 758 (3) ( 49 S. E. 754 ); Anderson v. Goodwin, 125 Ga. 663, 669 ( 54 S. E. 679 ); Jones v. Robinson, 172 Ga. 746, 747 (3c) ( 158 S. E. 752 ); Robertson v. Panlos, 208 Ga. 116, 118 ( 65 S. E. 2d 400 ). “ ‘It is an elementary rule of construction, as applied to a pleading, that it is to be construed most strongly against the pleader; and that if an inference unfavorable to the right of a party claiming a right under such a pleading may be fairly drawn from the facts stated therein, such inference will prevail in determining th…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Robertson v. Panlos
Anderson v. Goodwin, 125 Ga. 663, 669 ( 54 S. E. 679 ).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
American Surety Co. v. Wayne County
Justice v. Aikin, 104 Ga. 714 ( 30 S. E. 941 ); Anderson v. Goodwin, 125 Ga. 663, 669 ( 54 S. E. 679 ). 2.
cited
Cited "see"
Smith v. Cochran
See Anderson v. Goodwin, 125 Ga. 663, 670 ( 54 S. E. 679 ), and cases cited in Smith v. Bennett, ante, 159.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Hubert Realty Co. v. Bland
See also Anderson v. Goodwin, 125 Ga. 663 ( 54 S. E. 679 ); Cottle v. Harrold, Johnson & Co., 72 Ga. 830 ; Bank of Southwestern Georgia v. McGarrah, 120 Ga. 944 ( 48 S. E. 393 ); First Nat.
Shelley
v.
Baker
v.
Baker
Supreme Court of Georgia.
May 24, 1906.
Ernest Dart, for plaintiff in error. Max Isaac, contra.
Beck.
Cited by 4 opinions | Published
Beck, J.
1. A promissory note not containing any words of negotiability is so far negotiable by indorsement of the payee in blank as to pass the-title to a bona fide holder and enable him to sue the maker in his own name; and while the maker of such note could, as against the holder, set up all the defenses which would have been open to him against the-payee, nevertheless, if, when sued by the holder upon the note, the maker fails to set up and sustain by evidence any defense which would have been good as against the payee, the holder is entitled to a recovery against the maker. See National Bank v. Leonard, 91 Ga. 805.
2. There was no error in overruling the certiorari.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur.