Phillips v. Bullard
| Decision Date | 31 January 1877 |
| Citation | 58 Ga. 257 |
| Parties | Etheldred E. Phillips, plaintiff in err0r. v. Madison Bullard, defendant in error. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Evidence. Checks. Debtor and Creditor. New Trial. *Before Judge Pate. Pulaski Superior Court. May Term, 1876.
The following, taken in connection with the opinion, sufficiently reports this case:
Defendant, after testifying that, at the time when the check was given, he had sufficient funds on deposit at the bank to meet the indebtedness, offered to prove that, at the close of the civil war, the bank was generally reputed to be insolvent. This evidence was rejected by the court.
The court charged, among other things, substantially as follows: Bank checks are not payment until themselves paid. If the jury believe, from the evidence, that the check was presented for payment within a reasonable time, and payment was refusedexcept in Confederate money, and Phillips had notice of such refusal by the bank to pay, within a reasonable time, he is liable —Confederate money not being legal tender, and the holder of the check not being bound to receive it in payment thereof.
The court refused to charge, on request of defendant's counsel, that if unreasonable delay in the presentation of the check far payment were proved, then the burden of proof was on the plaintiff to show that Phillips was not injured by such delay. Also, that if the check was given May 1st, 1862, and was not presented for payment until the fall of 1862, the delay was at plaintiff's risk.
Lanier & Anderson, Hill & Harris, for plaintiff in error.
No appearance for defendant.
This was a suit on a bank check for $508.00, dated 1st of May, 1862. The check was given for services as overseer for the preceding year; the check was presented for payment in the fall, and payment was refused, except in Confederate *money. The jury found for plaintiff $254.00; the defendant moved for a new trial; the motion was overruled, and defendant excepted.
1. The first question is, was it admissible to prove the insolvency of the bank by general reputation? We think it was not—13 Ga., 417. Besides, it was admitted by the defendant, in his own testimony, that the bank, after the war, paid, or could pay, fifty cents on the dollar, and the evidence was offered to prove the insolvency of the bank, by reputation, after the war.
2. The next question is. Was the receipt of the check payment until it was itself paid? The Code says, in express terms,...
To continue reading
Request your trial