Case ID: ga-app_37/html/0518-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Luke, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

18502.
    SECURITY FINANCE CO. v. HERRIN DRUG CO.
    There was some evidence, though slight, to sustain the verdict in favor of the plea that the radio and the graphophone for which the notes sued on were given were worthless and that the plaintiff was not an innocent purchaser of the notes; and there was no error that would require a new trial.
    New Trial, 29 Oye. p. 824, n. 41.
    Decided December 14, 1927.
    Complaint; from Barrow superior court—Judge Stark. September 1, 1927.
    
      Q-. A. Johns, for plaintiff in error. B. B. Bussell Jr., contra.
   Luke, J.

Herrin Drug Company purchased from Brenard Manufacturing Company a combination radio and graphophone, and gave promissory notes therefor. These notes were indorsed by the' original payee to Security Finance Company, which sued on them. The defendant pleaded that the articles sold were worthless, and that the plaintiff was not an innocent purchaser for value of the notes. The jury found for the defendant. Held, that, though slight, there was some evidence to sustain the plea; that the special assignments disclose no reversible error; and that the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.