Court Opinion

ID: 5578618
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-11 01:32:08.139581+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:36:01.137760
License: Public Domain

Fish, C. J.
1. An amendment to an answer was properly disallowed which set up that the note, the foundation of the action, was void for the reason that it was given for a patent right, though- not expressing upon its face its consideration. Parr v. Erickson, 115 Ga. 873 (42 S. E. 240).
*623August 19, 1912.
Complaint. Before Judge Edwards. Haralson superior court. • July 20, 1911.
James Beall and Buford F. Boylcin, for plaintiffs in error.
Griffith & Matthews,' contra.
2. Under the evidence and the law applicable thereto, a verdict was demanded in behalf of the plaintiff, and the trial judge did not err in so directing. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.