Chandler-Blackstad Mercantile Co. v. Price & Co.
This text of 73 S.E. 413 (Chandler-Blackstad Mercantile Co. v. Price & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. Testimony that one party to a contract was induced to sign it by false statements as to its contents, and that he was prevented from reading the contents before signing, by the artifice and trick of another (fully stating in what the trick or artifice consisted), did not conflict with the elementary rule that parol testimony is not admissible to vary or alter the terms of a written contract, and waB properly admitted in evidence in support of the plea of fraud in procuring the contract. Marietta Fertilizer Co. v. Beckwith, 4 Ga. App. 245, and citations (61 S. E. 149); Truitt-Silvey Hat Co. v. Callaway, 130 Ga. 637 (61 S. E. 481).
2. No error appears, and the evidence supports the verdict.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
73 S.E. 413, 10 Ga. App. 383, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 525, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chandler-blackstad-mercantile-co-v-price-co-gactapp-1912.