defendant establishes defense in Georgia

20 Georgia opinions name it 1 courts 1972–2019 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Georgia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (11)

Case	Followed	Cited
Heath v. Boston Capital Corporate Tax Credit Fundgreen gactapp · 2002 · cited in 5 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2013–2019 2 sentences 2019"In a suit on a note, when signatures are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense." (Citation omitted.) Heath v. Boston Capital Corp. Tax Credit Fund VIII , 253 Ga. App. 537 , 538 (1), 559 S.E.2d 743 (2002). 2019"In a suit on a note, when signatures are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense." (Citation omitted.) Heath v. Boston Capital Corp. Tax Credit Fund VIII , 253 Ga. App. 537 , 538 (1), 559 S.E.2d 743 (2002).	4	5
Braswell v. Bank of Earlygreen gactapp · 1997 · cited in 4 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2001–2019 2 sentences 2002In a suit on a note, “when signatures are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.” (Citation, punctuation and footnote omitted.) Braswell v. Bank of Early, 229 Ga. App. at 447 . 2001In a suit on a note, “when signatures are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.” (Citation, punctuation and footnote omitted.) Braswell v. Bank of Early, 229 Ga. App. 445, 447 ( 494 SE2d 277 ) (1997).	3	4
Nash v. Township Investments, LLCgreen gactapp · 2013 · cited in 2 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013 2 sentences 2013See also Nash v. Township Investments, LLC, 320 Ga. App. 494, 495 ( 740 SE2d 236 ) (2013). 2013See also Nash v. Township Investments, LLC, 320 Ga. App. 494, 495 ( 740 SE2d 236 ) (2013).	2	2
Myers v. First Citizens Bank & Trust Co.green gactapp · 2013 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 2 sentences 2014To do so, the respondent must set forth specific facts showing the existence of a genuine issue of disputed fact.2 In a suit to enforce a promissory note, a plaintiff establishes a prima facie case by producing the note and showing that it was executed.3 “Once that prima facie case has been made, the plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law unless the defendant can establish a defense.”4 Similarly, in a suit on a personal guaranty, when the signature is admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles the holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defe 2014To do so, the respondent must set forth specific facts showing the existence of a genuine issue of disputed fact.2 In a suit to enforce a promissory note, a plaintiff establishes a prima facie case by producing the note and showing that it was executed.3 “Once that prima facie case has been made, the plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law unless the defendant can establish a defense.”4 Similarly, in a suit on a personal guaranty, when the signature is admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles the holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defe	1	1
Brookside Communities, LLC v. Lake Dow North Corp.green gactapp · 2004 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011 2 sentences 2011Bank &c., 220 Ga. App. 821, 822 (1) ( 470 SE2d 246 ) (1996) (“When signatures on a negotiable instrument are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.”) (citation and punctuation omitted). 12 See Brookside Communities, 268 Ga. App. at 786-787 (1). 13 (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 786 (1). 14 (Emphasis supplied.) 15 Under OCGA § 10-7-21, “[a]ny change in the nature or terms of a contract is called a ‘novation’ [and] such novation, without the consent of the surety, discharges him.” 16 Under O 2011Bank &c., 220 Ga. App. 821, 822 (1) ( 470 SE2d 246 ) (1996) (“When signatures on a negotiable instrument are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.”) (citation and punctuation omitted). 12 See Brookside Communities, 268 Ga. App. at 786-787 (1). 13 (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 786 (1). 14 (Emphasis supplied.) 15 Under OCGA § 10-7-21, “[a]ny change in the nature or terms of a contract is called a ‘novation’ [and] such novation, without the consent of the surety, discharges him.” 16 Under O	1	1
Rodgers v. First Union Nat. Bank of Georgiagreen gactapp · 1996 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011 2 sentences 2011Bank &c., 220 Ga. App. 821, 822 (1) ( 470 SE2d 246 ) (1996) (“When signatures on a negotiable instrument are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.”) (citation and punctuation omitted). 12 See Brookside Communities, 268 Ga. App. at 786-787 (1). 13 (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 786 (1). 14 (Emphasis supplied.) 15 Under OCGA § 10-7-21, “[a]ny change in the nature or terms of a contract is called a ‘novation’ [and] such novation, without the consent of the surety, discharges him.” 16 Under O 2011Bank &c., 220 Ga. App. 821, 822 (1) ( 470 SE2d 246 ) (1996) (“When signatures on a negotiable instrument are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.”) (citation and punctuation omitted). 12 See Brookside Communities, 268 Ga. App. at 786-787 (1). 13 (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 786 (1). 14 (Emphasis supplied.) 15 Under OCGA § 10-7-21, “[a]ny change in the nature or terms of a contract is called a ‘novation’ [and] such novation, without the consent of the surety, discharges him.” 16 Under O	1	1
Fielbon Development Co. v. Colony Bank of Houston Countygreen gactapp · 2008 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011 2 sentences 2011Co. v. Colony Bank of Houston County, 290 Ga. App. 847, 854 (2) (b) ( 660 SE2d 801 ) (2008). 18 Id. 2011Co. v. Colony Bank of Houston County, 290 Ga. App. 847, 854 (2) (b) ( 660 SE2d 801 ) (2008). 18 Id.	1	1
Maddox v. Leaphartgreen gactapp · 1994 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997 2 sentences 1997When a plaintiff established execution of a note, the burden was on the defendant to establish an affirmative defense, but on plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, it was [its] burden to establish non-existence of a genuine issue of fact as to each affirmative defense; [its] papers are carefully scrutinized and all doubts are resolved against [it], while the respondent's] papers are treated with considerable indulgence.” (Citations, punctuation and emphasis omitted.) Maddox v. Leaphart, 214 Ga. App. 340, 342 (3) ( 447 SE2d 694 ) (1994). 1997When a plaintiff established execution of a note, the burden was on the defendant to establish an affirmative defense, but on plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, it was [its] burden to establish non-existence of a genuine issue of fact as to each affirmative defense; [its] papers are carefully scrutinized and all doubts are resolved against [it], while the respondent's] papers are treated with considerable indulgence.” (Citations, punctuation and emphasis omitted.) Maddox v. Leaphart, 214 Ga. App. 340, 342 (3) ( 447 SE2d 694 ) (1994).	1	1
Cassidy v. Wilsongreen gactapp · 1990 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996 2 sentences 1996OCGA § 9-11-8 (c). [Cit.] Where not pleaded, it is waived. [Cits.]” Cassidy v. Wilson, 196 Ga. App. 6, 8 ( 395 SE2d 291 ). 1996OCGA § 9-11-8 (c). [Cit.] Where not pleaded, it is waived. [Cits.]” Cassidy v. Wilson, 196 Ga. App. 6, 8 ( 395 SE2d 291 ).	1	1
Collins v. Newman MacHine Co.green gactapp · 1989 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1995–1995 2 sentences 1995Collins v. Newman Machine Co., 190 Ga. App. 879, 882, 884 ( 380 SE2d 314 ). ‘When signatures (on a note) are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.’ (Emphasis supplied.) OCGA § 11-3-307 (2). [In the case sub judice, once] plaintiff established execution of a note, the burden was on the defendant to establish an affirmative defense (Jay Gleason Advertising Svc. v. Gleason, 193 Ga. App. 445 (1) ( 388 SE2d 43 )), but on plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, it was [DDCB, Inc.’s] burden to establish th 1995Collins v. Newman Machine Co., 190 Ga. App. 879, 882, 884 ( 380 SE2d 314 ). ‘When signatures (on a note) are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.’ (Emphasis supplied.) OCGA § 11-3-307 (2). [In the case sub judice, once] plaintiff established execution of a note, the burden was on the defendant to establish an affirmative defense (Jay Gleason Advertising Svc. v. Gleason, 193 Ga. App. 445 (1) ( 388 SE2d 43 )), but on plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, it was [DDCB, Inc.’s] burden to establish th	1	1
Wenke v. Nortongreen gactapp · 1969 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1980–1980 2 sentences 1980As stated in UCC 3-307(2) (Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 307(2)): “When signatures are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.” Under UCC § 3-408 (Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 408), “[w]ant or failure of consideration is a [matter of] defense ...” See Wenke v. Morton, 120 Ga. App. 70, 71-72 ( 169 SE2d 663 ) (1969);Leiter v. Arnold, 114 Ga. App. 323 ( 151 SE2d 175 ) (1966). 1980As stated in UCC 3-307(2) (Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 307(2)): “When signatures are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.” Under UCC § 3-408 (Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 408), “[w]ant or failure of consideration is a [matter of] defense ...” See Wenke v. Morton, 120 Ga. App. 70, 71-72 ( 169 SE2d 663 ) (1969);Leiter v. Arnold, 114 Ga. App. 323 ( 151 SE2d 175 ) (1966).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (9)

Case	Cited	Years
Jay Gleason Advertising Service, Inc. v. Gleason green gactapp · 1989 2 sentences 1997In the case of a suit on a note, “[w]hen signatures are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.” 1 (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Jay Gleason Advertising Svc. v. Gleason, 193 Ga. App. 445 (1) ( 388 SE2d 43 ) (1989). 1997In the case of a suit on a note, “[w]hen signatures are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.” 1 (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Jay Gleason Advertising Svc. v. Gleason, 193 Ga. App. 445 (1) ( 388 SE2d 43 ) (1989).	3	1994–1997
Gate City Furniture Co. v. Rumsey neutral gactapp · 1967 2 sentences 1994Gate City Furniture Co. v. Rumsey, 115 Ga. App. 753 (2) ( 156 SE2d 221 ). 1979When the signature on the check was established and the instrument produced this would entitle the holder "to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.” See Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 307 (Ga. L. 1962, pp. 156, 256); Gate City Furniture Co. v. Rumsey, 115 Ga. App. 753 (1, 2) ( 156 SE2d 221 ).	2	1979–1994
Cheely Motor Co. v. Pope neutral gactapp · 1967 2 sentences 1994Gate City Furniture Co. v. Rumsey, 115 Ga. App. 753 (2) ( 156 SE2d 221 ). 1979When the signature on the check was established and the instrument produced this would entitle the holder "to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.” See Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 307 (Ga. L. 1962, pp. 156, 256); Gate City Furniture Co. v. Rumsey, 115 Ga. App. 753 (1, 2) ( 156 SE2d 221 ).	2	1979–1994
Crosby v. Jordan green gactapp · 1970 2 sentences 1976Such pleadings are not defenses to this action and no evidence appears which raises any genuine issue of fact as between the parties. " Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 307 (2) clearly states, 'When signatures are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.’ Code Ann. § 81A-108 (c) states that 'In pleading to a preceding pleading, a party shall set forth affirmatively accord and satisfaction, arbitration and award, discharge in bankruptcy, duress, estoppel, failure of consideration, fraud, illegality, injury by fellow 1976Such pleadings are not defenses to this action and no evidence appears which raises any genuine issue of fact as between the parties. " Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 307 (2) clearly states, 'When signatures are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.’ Code Ann. § 81A-108 (c) states that 'In pleading to a preceding pleading, a party shall set forth affirmatively accord and satisfaction, arbitration and award, discharge in bankruptcy, duress, estoppel, failure of consideration, fraud, illegality, injury by fellow	2	1972–1976
Newton v. Sibley neutral gactapp · 2005 2 sentences 2012See OCGA § 11-3-308 (b); Newton v. Sibley, 273 Ga. App. 343 ( 615 SE2d 185 ) (2005). 2012See OCGA § 11-3-308 (b); Newton v. Sibley, 273 Ga. App. 343 ( 615 SE2d 185 ) (2005).	1	2012–2012
Hart v. Trust Co. of Columbus green gactapp · 1980 1 sentence 1996By her production of the note and the admissions deemed to have been made by defendants in the case sub judice, plaintiff “presented a prima facie case that [she] was entitled to judgment on the promissory note, and [since defendants did not seek to withdraw their admissions, they consequently] failed to come forward with evidence sufficient to create an issue of fact to be decided by a jury.” Hart v. Trust Co. of Columbus, 154 Ga. App. 329, 330 , supra. The trial court correctly granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment over defendants’ contention that the instant action on a note secur	1	1996–1996
First Rome Bank v. Reese Oil Co. green gactapp · 1992 2 sentences 1995First Rome Bank v. Reese Oil Co., 206 Ga. App. 667 ( 426 SE2d 384 ). 1995First Rome Bank v. Reese Oil Co., 206 Ga. App. 667 ( 426 SE2d 384 ).	1	1995–1995
Leiter v. Arnold neutral gactapp · 1966 2 sentences 1980As stated in UCC 3-307(2) (Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 307(2)): “When signatures are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.” Under UCC § 3-408 (Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 408), “[w]ant or failure of consideration is a [matter of] defense ...” See Wenke v. Morton, 120 Ga. App. 70, 71-72 ( 169 SE2d 663 ) (1969);Leiter v. Arnold, 114 Ga. App. 323 ( 151 SE2d 175 ) (1966). 1980As stated in UCC 3-307(2) (Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 307(2)): “When signatures are admitted or established, production of the instrument entitles a holder to recover on it unless the defendant establishes a defense.” Under UCC § 3-408 (Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 408), “[w]ant or failure of consideration is a [matter of] defense ...” See Wenke v. Morton, 120 Ga. App. 70, 71-72 ( 169 SE2d 663 ) (1969);Leiter v. Arnold, 114 Ga. App. 323 ( 151 SE2d 175 ) (1966).	1	1980–1980
Freezamatic Corp. v. Brigadier Industries Corp. green gactapp · 1972 2 sentences 1976Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 307(2, 3).’” Freezamatic Corp. v. Brigadier Industries, 125 Ga. App. 767 ( 189 SE2d 108 ). 1976Code Ann. § 109A-3 — 307(2, 3).’” Freezamatic Corp. v. Brigadier Industries, 125 Ga. App. 767 ( 189 SE2d 108 ).	1	1976–1976

Statutes the citing opinions construe

GA § 11-3-307 (5) GA § 9-11-56 (4) GA § 11-3-308 (3) GA § 13-5-30 (3) GA § 13-6-11 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

TX 24 (1990–2025) LA 22 (1987–2023) GA 20 (1972–2019) IL 14 (1894–2023) CT 9 (1992–2019) MO 7 (1916–2004) CA 7 (1988–2023) MN 7 (2009–2026) MA 7 (1974–2025) MI 6 (2021–2025) MT 4 (1987–1995) AZ 3 (2013–2022) NE 3 (1979–1992) DC 3 (1979–1993) OH 3 (1993–2024) FL 3 (1981–2006) VA 2 (1972–1973) NM 2 (2017–2024) WA 2 (1985–2010) WI 2 (1989–2026) NY 2 (1977–2024) KS 2 (2012–2012) ND 2 (1977–2021)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check