Case ID: ga-app_30/html/0270-01.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

14354.
    Fidelity Investment Co. et al. v. McNab-Grimsley Co.
   Luke, J.

McNab-Grimsley Company filed a petition alleging that Fidelity Investment Corporation and E. H. Quo were indebted to it in the sum of $319, by reason of the following facts: that the said E. H. Quo and the Fidelity Investment Corporation operate a bank and have adopted the name of the Fidelity Savings Bank, and under this name issue cheeks and receive deposits, and pay upon the checks when such cannot be avoided; that on May 9, 1922, H. J. Washington, a director of the Fidelity Investment Company, issued his check on the said Fidelity Savings Bank, payable to petitioner, in the sum of $319; that on presentation of the check, for payment it was not paid and the defendants, through E. H. Quo, the executive head of the Fidelity Investment Corporation, made an entry thereon as follows: “60 days notice required on this. Q.”; that at the end of 60 days the checK was again presented and payment was refused, although the drawer of the check had sufficient funds on deposit to pay the same; that the entry “ 60 days notice required on this. Q.,” was such an acceptance of the check as to bind Fidelity Investment Company, the corporation, and E. H. Quo to pay the check, and, upon a failure so to do, to render them liable for said sum to the plaintiff. A general demurrer to the petition was overruled, and the defendants excepted. Held'. The court erred in overruling the general demurrer. Under the facts alleged the plaintiff could not recover as prayed.

Decided May 15, 1923.

Complaint; from Chatham superior court — Judge Meldrim. February 17, 1923.

The defendants demurred to the petition generally and specially, but insisted only on the general demurrer, contending that no cause of action was set out, because the petition fails to establish a privity of contract between the plaintiff and the defendants; that the addition of the words “ 60 days notice required on this. Q.” created no liability on the part of the defendants to pay the check.

William B. Sanderson, Alvan B. Bowe, for plaintiffs in error,

PL. P. Oobb, contra.

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.