O.C.G.A. § 44-12-22 (2019)

Annotations

Law reviews. For note, “Wrongful Refusal to Pay Insurance Claims in Georgia,” see 13 Ga. L. Rev. 935 (1979).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS ANALYSIS GENERAL CONSIDERATION REQUIREMENTS FOR ASSIGNMENT OF CHOSES IN ACTION ASSIGNABLE CHOSES IN ACTION RIGHTS OF PARTIES General Consideration O.C.G.A. § 44-12-22 makes all choses in action assignable with full protection to the debtor as to all equities existing until the time of notice. Gilmore v. Bangs, 55 Ga. 403, 1875 Ga. LEXIS 438 (1875); Baer v. English & Co., 84 Ga. 403, 11 S.E. 453, 1889 Ga. LEXIS 276 (1889); Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Amos, 98 Ga. 533, 25 S.E. 575, 1896 Ga. LEXIS 92 (1896); Herring v. First Nat’l Bank, 13 Ga. App. 492, 79 S.E. 359, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 231 (1913); Few v. Pou, 32 Ga. App. 620, 124 S.E. 372, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 565

(1924); Lamon v. Perry, 33 Ga. App. 248, 125 S.E. 907, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 829 (1924). Except where contract involves relation of personal confidence, such as to show that the party conferring the rights must necessarily have intended them to be exercised only by that party upon whom they were actually conferred. Tifton, T. & G. Ry. v. Bedgood & Co., 116 Ga. 945, 43 S.E. 257, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 121 (1903); Adair v. Smith, 23 Ga. App. 290, 98 S.E. 224, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 91 (1919). Intent of O.C.G.A. § 44-12-22. - To avoid disturbing the time-honored rule

that none save the holder of the legal title can prosecute an action, O.C.G.A. § 4412-22 provides that a regular assignment, in conformity to established custom, should operate to pass the legal title, and thus enable the assignee to maintain a suit in own name. Haug v. Riley, 101 Ga. 372, 29 S.E. 44, 1897 Ga. LEXIS 236 (1897). The manifest intent of O.C.G.A. § 4412-22 seems to be that the notice prescribed is intended to fix the status of all equities, and that, after such notice has been given, any equities subsequently arising are barred. Ellis v. Dudley, 19 Ga. App. 566, 91 S.E. 904, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 239 (1917). Manner of assignment not prescribed by this section. - O.C.G.A. § 44-12-22 does not undertake to prescribe the manner in which choses in action may be assigned so as to vest the title. Haug v. Riley, 101 Ga. 372, 29 S.E. 44, 1897 Ga. LEXIS 236 (1897). O.C.G.A. § 44-12-22 does not prohibit parties from providing that their contract shall not be assignable. Mingledorff’s, Inc. v. Hicks, 133 Ga. App. 27, 209 S.E.2d 661, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 956 (1974). O.C.G.A. §§ 9-12-21 and 44-12-22 must be construed together harmoniously. Western Nat’l Bank v. Maverick Nat’l Bank, 90 Ga. 339, 16 S.E. 942, 1892 Ga. LEXIS 182 (1892). “Assigned” means transferred. Haug v. Riley, 101 Ga. 372, 29 S.E. 44, 1897 Ga. LEXIS 236 (1897). Damages to property and person distinguished. - O.C.G.A. §§ 44-12-22 and 44-12-24 distinguish damages to property and damages to person, and under them a right of action for damage to the person cannot be assigned, and a right of action for damage to property can be assigned. Benjamin-Ozburn Co. v. Morrow Transf. & Storage Co., 13 Ga. App. 636, 79 S.E. 753, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 286 (1913). Executed sale and executory contract to sell distinguished. - In an executed sale, as distinguished from an executory contract to sell, where the instrument purports to make a present transfer of title, if the existence of the subject matter is not then actual or com-

plete, it must at least be so potential as to amount to a present right in the vendor to a future interest or benefit; but where the instrument is merely an executory contract to sell, the parties may be bound, even though the subject matter is known to have neither an actual nor a potential existence, provided the agreement is not merely speculative, but contemplates an actual future delivery of the thing bargained for. Eibel v. Mechanics Loan & Sav. Co., 52 Ga. App. 349, 183 S.E. 133, 1935 Ga. App. LEXIS 168 (1935). Requirements for Assignment of Choses in Action Assignment of chose in action must be in writing. Hawkes v. Mobley, 174 Ga. 481, 163 S.E. 494, 1932 Ga. LEXIS 74 (1932); Jarecky v. Arnold, 51 Ga. App. 954, 182 S.E. 66, 1935 Ga. App. LEXIS 505 (1935); Lumpkin v. American Sur. Co., 69 Ga. App. 887, 27 S.E.2d 412, 1943 Ga. App. LEXIS 210 (1943). No special form of words is necessary to make assignment of chose in action. - Any language, however informal, will be sufficient to vest the title in the assignee, if it shows the intention of the owner of the chose in action to at once transfer it so that it will be the property of the transferee. Southern Mut. Life Ins. Ass’n v. Durdin, 132 Ga. 495, 64 S.E. 264, 1909 Ga. LEXIS 341 (1909); Myers v. Adams, 14 Ga. App. 520, 81 S.E. 595, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 359 (1914); Peck v. Calhoun, 38 Ga. App. 764, 145 S.E. 528, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 445 (1928); Baker v. Sutton, 47 Ga. App. 176, 170 S.E. 95, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 331 (1933); Lumpkin v. American Sur. Co., 61 Ga. App. 777, 7 S.E.2d 687, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 264 (1940). Where the petition set forth a right in the petitioners, as assignees of a written option, to a reconveyance of described land upon the tender and offer to perform as made to the defendant, the court did not err in overruling the motion to dismiss the action. Barron v. Anderson, 204 Ga. 7, 48 S.E.2d 846, 1948 Ga. LEXIS 546 (1948). Proof of immediate change of ownership required for assignment. - In order to infer an equitable assignment,

Requirements for Assignment of Choses in Action (Cont’d) such facts and circumstances must appear, as would not only raise an equity between the assignor and the assignee, but show that the parties contemplated an immediate change of ownership with respect to the particular fund in question, not a change of ownership when the fund should be collected or realized, but at the time of the transaction relied upon to constitute the assignment. Brown Guano Co. v. Bridges, 34 Ga. App. 652, 130 S.E. 695, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 460 (1925). Potential existence of fund assigned required. - It is not necessary that the fund attempted to be assigned shall be in actual existence at the time, for it is well settled that it is sufficient if it exists potentially. Brown Guano Co. v. Bridges, 34 Ga. App. 652, 130 S.E. 695, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 460 (1925). Previous acceptance by debtor required for partial assignment of debt. - A partial assignment of a debt due the assignor will not vest in the assignee such a title to the part of the debt assigned as can be enforced in a common-law action, without a previous acceptance by the debtor. Rivers v. Wright & Co., 117 Ga. 81, 43 S.E. 499, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 158 (1903); Central of Ga. Ry. v. Dover, 1 Ga. App. 240, 57 S.E. 1002, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 204 (1907); Ison Co. v. Atlantic Coast Line R.R., 17 Ga. App. 459, 87 S.E. 754, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 685 (1916). Employer’s assent to assignment of wages required to maintain action. - An action at law by the assignee against a railway company, for that part of the wages earned by the assignor at the date of the assignment, cannot be maintained, unless the railway company assented to the assignment. Central of Ga. Ry. v. Dover, 1 Ga. App. 240, 57 S.E. 1002, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 204 (1907). Assignable Choses in Action All choses in action arising upon contract, including accounts receivable, may be assigned so as to vest title and the right to sue on them in the assignee. William Iselin & Co. v. Davis, 157 Ga. App. 739, 278 S.E.2d 442, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 1997 (1981).

Claim arising from breach of contract to become surety on a guano note is assignable. Adams v. Williams, 125 Ga. 430, 54 S.E. 99, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 183 (1906). Insurance policies. - A policy of insurance being a chose in action may be assigned so as to vest the title in the assignee, but the assignee takes it subject to the equities existing between the assignor and debtor at the time of the assignment. Morris v. Georgia Loan, Sav. & Banking Co., 109 Ga. 12, 34 S.E. 378, 1899 Ga. LEXIS 577 (1899); Sprouse v. Skinner, 155 Ga. 119, 116 S.E. 606, 1923 Ga. LEXIS 21 (1923); Baldwin v. Atlanta Joint Stock Land Bank, 189 Ga. 607, 7 S.E.2d 178, 1940 Ga. LEXIS 346 (1940); Parramore v. Williams, 215 Ga. 179, 109 S.E.2d 745, 1959 Ga. LEXIS 427 (1959). After a life insurance policy has matured by the death of the insured, the policy may be assigned as any chose in action regardless of any stipulation in the policy. Progressive Life Ins. Co. v. Bohannon, 74 Ga. App. 617, 40 S.E.2d 564, 1946 Ga. App. LEXIS 598 (1946). A beneficiary, having only a divestible interest which is not a vested right, is, in effect, divested of this interest by the assignment of an insurance policy subject to the payment of a debt. Ruis v. Bank of Albany, 213 Ga. 41, 96 S.E.2d 580, 1957 Ga. LEXIS 291 (1957). An assignment of an insurance policy for value received which recites that it “is an absolute assignment” is an absolute assignment as against the original beneficiary, and the insured under such an assignment will have no interest in the policy after assignment. Parramore v. Williams, 215 Ga. 179, 109 S.E.2d 745, 1959 Ga. LEXIS 427 (1959). Reinsurance company proceeding as sole claimant. - Trial court properly denied the appellant’s motion to stay arbitration and granted the appellees’ motion to compel arbitration because the assignment of the claims to the reinsurance company was valid and enforceable and, therefore, the reinsurance company could proceed as the sole claimant. McLarens Young Int’l, Inc. v. Am. Safety Cas. Ins. Co., 334 Ga. App. 819, 780 S.E.2d 464, 2015 Ga. App. LEXIS 730 (2015).

Subscription to capital stock of railroad company is a chose in action and assignable, and the assignee can enforce its payment under circumstances where the company could do so. Chattanooga R. & C.R.R. v. Warthen, 98 Ga. 599, 25 S.E. 988, 1896 Ga. LEXIS 110 (1896). Any chose in action involving a property right may be assigned, and so a deed, as made after a breach, vested all the rights of the grantor as to this property, including the right to sue. Evans v. Brown, 196 Ga. 364, 27 S.E.2d 300 (1943). Automobile retail installment sales contract. - Automobile dealer had the right to assign a retail installment sales contract, and a discount deducted from the face amount of the contract when it was sold to a finance company was not a finance charge required to be disclosed by the dealer to the purchasers. Chancellor v. Gateway Lincoln-Mercury, Inc., 233 Ga. App. 38, 502 S.E.2d 799, 1998 Ga. App. LEXIS 885 (1998). Chose in action based on tort is transferable where it directly involves right of property. Colter v. Livingston, 154 Ga. 401, 114 S.E. 430, 1922 Ga. LEXIS 376 (1922); Lamon v. Perry, 33 Ga. App. 248, 125 S.E. 907, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 829 (1924); Lumpkin v. American Sur. Co., 69 Ga. App. 887, 27 S.E.2d 412, 1943 Ga. App. LEXIS 210 (1943); Ricketts v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 127 Ga. App. 483, 194 S.E.2d 311, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 922 (1972). While action is pending for tort, there can be no legal assignment of the cause of action or of the damages to be recovered. Gamble v. Cent. R.R. & Banking Co., 80 Ga. 595, 7 S.E. 315, 1888 Ga. LEXIS 198 (1888); Sullivan v. Curling, 149 Ga. 96, 99 S.E. 533, 1919 Ga. LEXIS 145 (1919); Colter v. Livingston, 154 Ga. 401, 114 S.E. 430, 1922 Ga. LEXIS 376 (1922). An action of deceit arising under O.C.G.A. § 51-6-2, which is a tort, is not assignable. Bates & Co. v. Forsyth, 64 Ga. 232, 1879 Ga. LEXIS 38 (1879). An action of deceit arising under O.C.G.A. § 51-6-2, which is a tort, is

not assignable. Bates & Co. v. Forsyth, 64 Ga. 232, 1879 Ga. LEXIS 38 (1879). Bank entitled to assign right of action against defalcating employee. - Where a surety company contracts to indemnify a bank against loss occasioned by the defalcation of any employee thereof, and upon an alleged defalcation by one of the bank’s employees, the company pays the loss sustained by the bank upon the presentation to it by the bank of a claim of loss in accordance with the terms of the contract, the bank may properly transfer and assign its right of action against the employee to recover the amount of its loss to the company, and the surety company may maintain an action in its own name against the defalcating employee of the bank to recover the amount paid by it to the bank under the contract of indemnity made with the bank. Lumpkin v. American Sur. Co., 61 Ga. App. 777, 7 S.E.2d 687, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 264 (1940). Liability is asset assignable by trustee in bankruptcy of a corporation under an order of the referee in bankruptcy. Baker v. Sutton, 47 Ga. App. 176, 170 S.E. 95, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 331 (1933). Transfer of note is fully within the terms of O.C.G.A. § 44-12-22. Jackson v. State, 5 Ga. App. 177, 62 S.E. 726, 1908 Ga. App. LEXIS 58 (1908). Account is assignable. - See Mordecai v. Stewart, 37 Ga. 364, 1867 Ga. LEXIS 175 (1867); Barron v. Walker, 80 Ga. 121, 7 S.E. 272, 1887 Ga. LEXIS 339 (1887); Akin v. Feagin, 90 Ga. 72, 15 S.E. 654, 1892 Ga. LEXIS 126 (1892); Nix v. Ellis, 118 Ga. 345, 45 S.E. 404, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 557 (1903); Central of Ga. Ry. v. King Bros. & Co., 137 Ga. 369, 73 S.E. 632, 1912 Ga. LEXIS 24 (1912); Southern Ry. v. Pitner & Raines, 17 Ga. App. 451, 87 S.E. 754, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 673 (1916). Right of action on letter of credit is assignable. Adams v. Williams, 125 Ga. 430, 54 S.E. 99, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 183 (1906). Bond for title is assignable. - Although a bond for title obligated the owners of certain land to make title thereto to the obligee, heirs, executors, and admin-

Assignable Choses in Action (Cont’d) istrators, without adding assigns, it is nevertheless assignable under O.C.G.A. § 44-12-22. Fulcher & Co. v. Daniel & Son, 80 Ga. 74, 4 S.E. 259, 1887 Ga. LEXIS 324 (1887). Architects’ certificate is assignable. Timmons v. Citizens Bank, 11 Ga. App. 69, 74 S.E. 798, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 261 (1912). Entry in bank book. - An entry in a bank book is equivalent to a receipt for money and is, consequently, evidence of a loan and of a contract for repayment on demand; as such, it is sufficient to establish the relation of debtor and creditor between the parties and it is assignable so as to vest a right of action in the assignee in the assignee’s own name. Flanders & Huguenin v. Maynard, 58 Ga. 56, 1877 Ga. LEXIS 8 (1877). Covenants are assignable. Tucker v. McArthur, 103 Ga. 409, 30 S.E. 283, 1898 Ga. LEXIS 134 (1898). Right of heir to interest in ancestor’s estate is assignable. Greenwood v. Greenwood, 178 Ga. 605, 173 S.E. 858, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 112 (1934). Contingent right in certain real estate is assignable even though it is not at all certain that it would ever be transformed into a present right. Chattahoochee Holdings, Inc. v. Marshall, 146 Ga. App. 658, 247 S.E.2d 167, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2496 (1978). Title to exemption assignable by debtor. - Although a debtor has no vested title or interest in an exemption at the time of its sale or assignment, the debtor has a chose in action and a potential right in the nature of a defeasible title, which is assignable. Eibel v. Mechanics Loan & Sav. Co., 52 Ga. App. 349, 183 S.E. 133, 1935 Ga. App. LEXIS 168 (1935). An interest in the title to an exemption may be assigned in good faith to a creditor, not only before the exemption is set aside by the court, but even before bankruptcy proceedings are instituted. Eibel v. Mechanics Loan & Sav. Co., 52 Ga. App. 349, 183 S.E. 133, 1935 Ga. App. LEXIS 168 (1935). O.C.G.A. § 44-12-22 inapplicable to bill of lading. Postell v. Avery & Co., 12

Ga. App. 507, 77 S.E. 666, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 614 (1913). Exclusive use of name. - The exclusive use of a person’s name conveyed to a party for consideration may be assigned by that party in an enforceable contract. Fletcher v. Atlanta Bd. of Realtors, Inc., 250 Ga. 21, 295 S.E.2d 737, 1982 Ga. LEXIS 979 (1982). Legal malpractice claims. - Appellate court properly affirmed the denial of summary judgment to a lawyer on a legal malpractice claim because in light of assignments allowable under O.C.G.A. §§ 44-12-22 and 44-12-24, the Georgia Supreme Court agrees that the assignment of legal malpractice claims is not prohibited as a matter of law. Villanueva v. First Am. Title Ins. Co., 292 Ga. 630, 740 S.E.2d 108, 2013 Ga. LEXIS 268 (2013). Georgia Supreme Court agrees with the Georgia Court of Appeals that legal malpractice claims are not per se unassignable. Villanueva v. First Am. Title Ins. Co., 292 Ga. 630, 740 S.E.2d 108, 2013 Ga. LEXIS 268 (2013). Rights of Parties Assignee can acquire no greater rights than the assignor had. Healey v. Morgan, 135 Ga. App. 915, 219 S.E.2d 628, 1975 Ga. App. LEXIS 1871 (1975). Contracting parties may waive or renounce what law has established in their favor provided such waiver or renunciation does not thereby injure others or affect the public interest. Young v. John Deere Plow Co., 102 Ga. App. 132, 115 S.E.2d 770, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 570 (1960). Debtor under a conditional sale contract, by expressly agreeing not to set up as a defense to an action on the contract by the assignee thereof any claim the debtor may have had against the assignor of the contract, waived the right to plead failure of consideration in an action on the contract by the assignee, and such plea and the cross action for the down payment are without merit. Jones v. Universal C.I.T. Credit Corp., 88 Ga. App. 24, 75 S.E.2d 822, 1953 Ga. App. LEXIS 998 (1953); Young v. John Deere Plow Co., 102 Ga. App. 132, 115 S.E.2d 770, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 570 (1960).

Because third party failed to present sufficient evidence supporting its position that it had a right, as successor in interest, to sue on a creditor’s account with the creditor’s debtor in order to support that right, summary judgment in its favor in suit against the debtor was erroneously entered. Ponder v. CACV of Colo., LLC, 289 Ga. App. 858, 658 S.E.2d 469, 2008 Ga. App. LEXIS 218 (2008). Agreement for debt setoff. - If the agreement is for a consideration, it is binding on the same terms as any other agreement; and if it is executed, it needs no consideration. National Sur. Corp. v. Algernon Blair, Inc., 114 Ga. App. 30, 150 S.E.2d 256, 1966 Ga. App. LEXIS 648, rev’d, 222 Ga. 672, 151 S.E.2d 724, 1966 Ga. LEXIS 595 (1966). Claim of assignee of judgment is subject to such equities and defenses as may have existed in favor of the judgment debtor against the judgment creditor at the time of the assignment, but is not subject to rights which did not then exist in favor of such judgment debtor and of which the judgment debtor did not become possessed until some time later, as by the subsequent purchase of judgments against the judgment creditor. Sheffield v. Preacher, 175 Ga. 719, 165 S.E. 742, 1932 Ga. LEXIS 318 (1932). Equities existing between assignor and debtor include the terms and conditions of the contract under which the indebtedness arose. National Sur. Corp. v. Algernon Blair, Inc., 114 Ga. App. 30, 150 S.E.2d 256, 1966 Ga. App. LEXIS 648, rev’d, 222 Ga. 672, 151 S.E.2d 724, 1966 Ga. LEXIS 595 (1966). Holder’s rights unaffected by equities between maker and payee. - The equities between the maker and the payee, originating after a transfer to a third person, will not affect the rights of the holder, though the transfer is made after the note becomes due. Central Trust Co. v. Fargason, 21 Ga. App. 696, 94 S.E. 902, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 484 (1918). Effect of mere equitable assignment. - An assignee may sue in own name, but a mere equitable assignment or interest arising from paying for a chose in action, without written transfer, gives no right to sue upon it in the name of the

equitable assignee. Florida Coca Cola Bottling Co. v. Ricker, 136 Ga. 411, 71 S.E. 734, 1911 Ga. LEXIS 562 (1911). See also Lamon v. Perry, 33 Ga. App. 248, 125 S.E. 907, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 829 (1924). Right to sue where subject matter of assignment not mere naked right of action. - Where the subject matter of a sale, purchase, and assignment is not a mere naked right of action, but assignable property, such as an execution, mortgage and note, the ownership carried with it a right to sue as an incident of such ownership. Reed v. Janes, 84 Ga. 380, 11 S.E. 401, 1889 Ga. LEXIS 273 (1889). Upon the transfer to the plaintiffs of a bill of lading calling for a full quantity of corn, there is assigned to plaintiffs the right of action for the defendant’s loss or conversion of a part of the corn. Askew & Co. v. Southern Ry., 1 Ga. App. 79, 58 S.E. 242, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 153 (1907). Mere equitable title insufficient when plaintiff relies on title to recover possession of personal property wrongfully withheld from the plaintiff who must show a legal title; a mere equitable title will not suffice. Eibel v. Mechanics Loan & Sav. Co., 52 Ga. App. 349, 183 S.E. 133, 1935 Ga. App. LEXIS 168 (1935). Absent description of property equitable interest conveyed by instrument other than draft. - An instrument, other than a draft, purporting to assign a sum of money to be paid out of a fund claimed to be in the hands of another, without describing the identical money intended to be conveyed, will not of itself convey legal title to any part of the fund which in fact may be in the hands of such other person; if anything is conveyed it is an equitable interest in the entire fund. Western & A.R.R. v. Union Inv. Co., 128 Ga. 74, 57 S.E. 100, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 31 (1907). Choses in action are not subject to seizure and sale under executions based upon ordinary judgment, and can only be reached by the judgment creditor through a garnishment or some other collateral proceeding; and, inasmuch as such garnishment or collateral proceeding is necessary to fix the lien of the judgment so as to make it effective, an

Rights of Parties (Cont’d) assignment of the chose in action by the debtor before the institution of such collateral proceeding passes to the assignee the property of the debtor in the chose in action assigned, freed from the lien of a general judgment previously rendered against the assignor. Greenwood v. Greenwood, 178 Ga. 605, 173 S.E. 858, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 112 (1934). Assignment of entire chose in action entitled to priority over prior

partial assignment. - Where a second assignment is of the entire chose in action, it vests in the assignee the legal title to the whole chose in action, and it is entitled to priority over the holder of a prior partial assignment of a chose in action to which the debtor of the assignor has not assented. King Bros. & Co. v. Central of Ga. Ry., 135 Ga. 225, 69 S.E. 113, 1912A Am. Ann. Cas. 672 (1910).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 6 Am. Jur. 2d, Assignments, §§ 58, 59. 63 Am. Jur. 2d, Property, §§ 26, 27. Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms. 2A Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Assignments, § 2. C.J.S. 6A C.J.S., Assignments, § 36. 73 C.J.S., Property, § 22. ALR. Assignability of right of action ex delicto for injury to property, as affected by statute, 5 A.L.R. 130. Payment of judgment by debtor without notice of its assignment, 32 A.L.R. 1021. Priority as between one who redelivers papers or securities not transferable by endorsement or delivery to pledgor or assignee and a bona fide purchaser from the latter, 37 A.L.R. 1540.

Priority of assignment of chose in action over subsequent garnishment as affected by lack of notice to debtor of assignment, 52 A.L.R. 109. Meaning and scope of covenant in assignment of claim as regards legality or quality of claim, 91 A.L.R. 548. Assignability of statutory claim against employer for nonpayment of wages, 48 A.L.R.2d 1385. Law governing assignment of wages or salary, 1 A.L.R.3d 927. Validity, in contract for installment sale of consumer goods, or commercial paper given in connection therewith, of provision waiving, as against assignee, defenses good against seller, 39 A.L.R.3d 518.