91 S.E.2d 196 (Ga.App. 1956), 35823, King v. Bonnerman

Citation: 91 S.E.2d 196, 93 Ga.App. 210

Party Name: W. C. KING et al. v. Matthew BONNERMAN.

Attorney: A mere declaration by an agent which is not in corroboration of other evidence, either direct or circumstantial, tending to prove the agency, is not competent to prove the agency, and such declaration, standing, alone, is hearsay and is of no provative value, whether objected to or not; therefore...

Case Date: January 12, 1956

Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Linked as:

Document options

Printable page
Email this

Extract

91 S.E.2d 196 (Ga.App. 1956), 35823, King v. Bonnerman

No longer available (Autolink)

See the full content of this document

This document cites

Georgia - 119 S.E. 336 (Ga.App. 1923), 13958, Swint v. Milner Banking Co.
Georgia - 197 S.E. 862 (Ga. 1938), 12277, Higgins v. Trentham
Georgia - 12 S.E.2d 141 (Ga.App. 1940), 28327, Foster v. Jones
Georgia - 32 S.E.2d 207 (Ga.App. 1944), 30664, Nesbit v. State
Georgia - 32 S.E.2d 540 (Ga.App. 1944), 30590, Hamilton v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.

See all quotations