Doctor Shoop Family Medicine Co. v. Clifford

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Doctor Shoop Family Medicine Co. v. Clifford

75 S.E. 822, 11 Ga. App. 491, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 79

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 24, 1912

Docket3819

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 75 S.E. 822 (Doctor Shoop Family Medicine Co. v. Clifford) 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.

Bluebook

Doctor Shoop Family Medicine Co. v. Clifford, 75 S.E. 822, 11 Ga. App. 491, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 79 (Ga. Ct. App. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

Russell, J.

While parol evidence is inadmissible to alter or vary the terms of a written contract, still it is admissible for the purpose of explaining the true meaning of any portion of a written contract which is of itself unintelligible or ambiguous. The court in this case did not err in permitting evidence explanatory of what was meant by the stipulation in the present contract, under which the plaintiff agreed to furnish, in addition to the articles which were the subjeet-matter of purchase, “all advertising matter that goes with an order of this size.” The superior court did not err in overruling the certiorari.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Russell, J.

While parol evidence is inadmissible to alter or vary the terms of a written contract, still it is admissible for the purpose of explaining the true meaning of any portion of a written contract which is of itself unintelligible or ambiguous. The court in this case did not err in permitting evidence explanatory of what was meant by the stipulation in the present contract, under which the plaintiff agreed to furnish, in addition to the articles which were the subjeet-matter of purchase, “all advertising matter that goes with an order of this size.” The superior court did not err in overruling the certiorari.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

75 S.E. 822, 11 Ga. App. 491, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 79, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doctor-shoop-family-medicine-co-v-clifford-gactapp-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack