Bright v. Auto Finance & Loan Co

• Decision Date: 17 March 1936
• Docket Number: No. 24688.,24688.
• Citation: 184 S.E. 786,52 Ga.App. 841
• Parties: BRIGHT et al. v. AUTO FINANCE & LOAN CO.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

52 Ga.App. 841

184 S.E. 786

BRIGHT et al.

v.AUTO FINANCE & LOAN CO.

No. 24688.

Court of Appeals of Georgia,

Division No. 2.

March 17, 1936.

Syllabus by Editorial Staff.

Error from City Court of Albany; Clayton Jones, Judge.

Action by Auto Finance & Loan Company against Jessie Bright and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error.

Affirmed.

E. L. Smith and R. J. Bacon, both of Albany, for plaintiffs in error.

A. N. Durden, of Albany, for defendant

STEPHENS, Judge.

1. It is possible that "Auto Finance & Loan Company, Inc., " and "Auto Finance & Loan Company" are one and the same; that the Auto Finance & Loan Company is a corporation; and that the expression "Inc." in "Auto Finance & Loan Company, Inc., " is merely descriptive of the character of Auto Finance & Loan Company as being a corporation. Whether a note has been transferred is a question of fact. Therefore, a written transfer of a note to "Auto Finance &. Loan Company, Inc., " may in fact be a transfer of the note to "Auto Finance & Loan Company." Where it is alleged in the petition, in a suit to recover upon a note, brought by "Auto Finance & Loan Company" against the makers, that the payee of the note had transferred it to the plaintiff, and there appears a written transfer on the note to "Auto Finance & Loan Company, Inc., " the allegation is sufficient as one that the note was in fact transferred to the plaintiff. Assuming, however, that where the note contains a provision that title to an automobile for which the note was given in payment of the purchase price is retained in the payee as security for the payment of the note, and there is a writ ten transfer on the note by the payee which recites that "for value received we hereby sell and convey the title of the within described property to the Auto Finance & Loan Company Inc. with recourse, " that the written transfer conveys only the title of the payee to the automobile and does not convey and pass title to the note, yet where it is alleged in the petition that the plaintiff the "Auto Finance & Loan Company" is the holder of the note and that the note was transferred to the plaintiff for value by the payee of the note, the allegation is sufficient as one alleging that the plaintiff is the holder by transfer of the legal title to the note. "Where the holder of an instrument payable to his order transfers it for value without indorsing it, the transfer vests in the transferee such title as the transferor had therein, and the transferee acquires, in addition, the right to have the indorsement of the transferor." Code 1933, § 14-420. The petition therefore is not subject to demurrer upon the ground that it does not appear that the note was transferred to the plaintiff, or that it does not appear that the...