Deposits general, interest on, not allowable; and bank paying check with forged indorsement, not liable for interest. Atlanta National Bank vs. Burke, 597(3). Ibid. 597(1). Forged indorsement on check, bank liable to maker, though maker had himself been imposed on by forged name to note and mortgage, the basis of the check. Same: That genuine signature of lowed forged one, not alter case. Same: Bank paying and returning to maker with other checks, not charge him with notice. Ibid. 597(2). subsequent indorser folIbid. Same: Maker not guilty of laches in not discovering for three years. Ibid. 600. Reduction of capital stock by resolution below minimum of charter, creditors may call on shareholders for difference. Hill vs. Silvey, 507(2). Same: Future creditors, however, cannot hold shareholders. for more, unless credit given on faith of original subscription. Ibid. BARTOW COUNTY. City court of, bill of exceptions does not lie from, to superior court. Memmler vs. Roberts, Duff vs. Jones, 351. BASTARDY. See Criminal Law. BILL OF EXCEPTIONS. City court, does not lie from, to superior court. Memmler vs. Roberts, City court, from, to superior court, unconstitutional, and supersedeas bond void. Memmler vs. Roberts, 659. Same: No judgment entered on bond. Ibid. BILLS OF EXCHANGE. Acceptance: entry by party directed to pay, "Cr. the within $2.30; the balance to be paid in January next," but not signed, not binding. Ingle vs. Davis, 766. Order of S. to D. to pay bearer $33, but no time specified, is a, and due as soon as presented and accepted. Ibid. BILLS OF LADING. See Indorsement; Railroads. BOND FOR TITLE. See Forgery. BONDS. See Administrators and Executors. Amendable, all bonds taken under requisition of law in course of judicial proceedings, are, under 23505. Lytle vs. De Vaughn, 226(1). Same: Applied to forthcoming bond filed with illegality to mortgage foreclosure. Ibid. Same: When right is to be exercised. 226(2). Duress of illegal imprisonment, principal signing under, surety not bound. Patterson vs. Gibson, 802(1). Same: Knowledge of imprisonment but not of its illegality, not alter case. Ibid. Official, may be sued on, under code, 12 and 2160(4), directly on bond in first instance. Jefferson vs. Hartley, 718. BOUNDARIES. See Levy and Sale. BRIDGES. County liable for injuries from defects in, where no bond taken, and may be sued before contractor. Arnold vs. Henry County, 730. BURDEN OF PROOF. Mortgages attacked for fraud, creditors would seem entitled to open and conclude. Moore vs. Brown, 11(3). Open and conclude, right to, accorded to wrong side, not reversible error when verdict undoubtedly correct. Ibid. BURGLARY. See Criminal Law. CARTERSVILLE. Bill of exceptions from city court to supericr court unconstitutional, and supersedeas bond void. Memmler vs. Roberts, 659. CASES CRITICIZED OR DOUBTED City Council of Augusta vs. Radcliffe, 66 Ga. 469.. 363 585 Central Railroad Co. vs. Collins, 40 Ga. 582................................. 546 Hazlehurst vs. Sav., Griffin & N. Ala. Railroad Co. 43 Ga. 13........ 546 Varner vs. Gunn, 61 Ga. 54....... Venable vs. Cody, 68 Ga. 171................. ........................... ............................................. 363 236 Vickers vs. Atlanta and West Point Railroad Co. 64 Ga. 306......... 417 Wade vs. Weslow & Co. 62 Ga. 562... 775 Westbrook vs. Davis, 48 Ga. 473........ 236 Western & Atlantic Railroad Co. vs. McCauley, 68 Ga. 818............ 414 West vs. Bennett, 59 Ga. 507. 18 City Council of Augusta vs. Radcliffe, 66 Ga. 469.... CAVEAT EMPTOR. See Tendor and Purchaser. CERTIORARI. Amendable, petition is not. Western Railroad vs. Jackson, 478. Discretion of judge not interfered with, question of fact only being involved. McMillan vs. Ambrose, 196. Petition must set forth specifically the ground of error, and is not amendable. Western & Atlantic Railroad vs. Jackson, 478. Second verdict for plaintiff in justice's court, error to set aside, when fully sustained by evidence. Turner vs. Rome Railroad, 336. CHARGE OF COURT. Agent: sayings of one man not make another, or corporation, his principal; error to refuse charge, wher. Fla. Midland vs. Varnedoe, 176(6). Amendment improperly allowed, held cured because nullified by charge. McKamy vs. Cooper, 679(1). Conflicting testimony, duty to reconcile; failure to charge as to, not work new trial, where no request. Morgan vs. Swann, 807. Damages, rules for estimating, judge should give, in proper case; and statement, "I have given you this rule because I cannot know how you will find, error. Bray vs. Latham, 640(3). Details of the law, if counsel want court to go into, should call attention. Moore vs. Brown, 11(4). Same: Otherwise court may, in general terms, charge controlling principles, and there stop. Ibid. Direct verdict, denying argument, court may, in suit count where service personal and no plea. Gate City Gas Co. 150(1). on open ac Stephens vs. Entire charge excepted to, not good unless whole erroneous. Flemister vs. State, 779(6). Entire charge taken together, parts complained of not erroneous. Central vs. Nash, 581(3, 4); Flemister ns. State, 769(5). Enumerate facts, charge may, and tell jury they may infer guilt therefrom. Hunt vs. State, 140(2). (See 80 Ga. 232.) Same: Ells vs. State, 20 Ga. 438, distinguished. Ibid. 142. Errors in charge disregarded where verdict demanded by evidence. Sumby vs. State, 746. Excitement as an excuse for passenger jumping from train when about to be carried beyond station, discussed. Covington vs. Western & Atlantic Railroad, 274. Good character, error to charge that jury might consider if "other evidence" left guilt doubtful. Shropshire vs. State, 589(2). Good faith, question of, should be left to jury; but failure not cause reversal where verdict demanded. Ware vs. Barlow, 2(2a). Harmless error; containing irrelevant matter, no cause for new trial where verdict (murder) correct. Fry vs. State, 646(5). Husband, secret contract of, with wife, bona fides must be clearly established; proper charge as to. Skellie vs. James, 424. Johnson vs. Cox, 25. Immaterial errors in, not work new trial. Jumping from train under excitement, not error to refuse to charge as to, when. Covington vs. Western Railroad, 273(1). Malice, express; charge that certain things "would be evidence of express malice," not reversible error, when. Starke vs. State, 593(3). Minor in business on own account, charge as to purchases made in aid of, approved. McKamy vs. Cooper, 679(3). Negligence as matter of law, proper charge as to. Railroad vs. Young, 418. Western & Atlantic Negligence is a "question" for the jury, inaccurate, but corrected by other parts. Central Railroad vs. Nash, 586(3). Negligence; plaintiff limited to acts specified; charge as to, approved here. Ibid. 581(2). Same: Head-note in Georgia Railroad vs. Oaks, 52 Ga. 410, criticized. Ibid. 585. Omission to charge not work new trial without special request, when. Morgan vs. Swann, 207(2). Ordinary diligence may be contrasted with extraordinary. Mayor vs. Caldwell, 76(5). "Other instances" under 24334, should be charged where evidence to show husband killed to prevent intercourse with wife. Cloud vs. State, 449. |