Fleming v. Satterfield

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Fleming v. Satterfield

61 S.E. 518, 4 Ga. App. 351, 1908 Ga. App. LEXIS 296

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 18, 1908

Docket973

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 61 S.E. 518 (Fleming v. Satterfield) 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

Fleming v. Satterfield, 61 S.E. 518, 4 Ga. App. 351, 1908 Ga. App. LEXIS 296 (Ga. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinions

Hill, C. J.

1. “Tlie rule is well settled that where the parties have reduced to writing what appears to be a complete and certain agreement, importing a legal obligation, it will, in the absence of fraud, accident, or mistake, be conclusively presumed that the writing contains the whole of the agreement between the parties; and parol evidence of prior, contemporaneous, or subsequent conversations, representations, or statements will not be received for the purpose of adding to or varying the written instrument.” 2 Mechem on Sales, § 1254; Civil Code, § 5201.

2. Where a promissory note is given for the purchase-money of a mule, which is unambiguous and unconditional, and contains no warranty of the soundness of the mule, no express warranty can be added to the note by parol; and a plea which set up an express warranty, alleged to have been made by parol contemporaneously with the execution of such a note, was properly stricken on demurrer. Bullard v. Brewer, 118 Ga. 918 (45 S. E. 711) ; Seitz v. Brewers’ Refrigerator Co., 141 U. S. 510 (12 Sup. Ct. 46, 35 L. ed. 837) ; 2 Mechem on Sales, § 1254.

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

Hill, C. J.

1. “Tlie rule is well settled that where the parties have reduced to writing what appears to be a complete and certain agreement, importing a legal obligation, it will, in the absence of fraud, accident, or mistake, be conclusively presumed that the writing contains the whole of the agreement between the parties; and parol evidence of prior, contemporaneous, or subsequent conversations, representations, or statements will not be received for the purpose of adding to or varying the written instrument.” 2 Mechem on Sales, § 1254; Civil Code, § 5201.

2. Where a promissory note is given for the purchase-money of a mule, which is unambiguous and unconditional, and contains no warranty of the soundness of the mule, no express warranty can be added to the note by parol; and a plea which set up an express warranty, alleged to have been made by parol contemporaneously with the execution of such a note, was properly stricken on demurrer. Bullard v. Brewer, 118 Ga. 918 (45 S. E. 711) ; Seitz v. Brewers’ Refrigerator Co., 141 U. S. 510 (12 Sup. Ct. 46, 35 L. ed. 837) ; 2 Mechem on Sales, § 1254.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 S.E. 518, 4 Ga. App. 351, 1908 Ga. App. LEXIS 296, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fleming-v-satterfield-gactapp-1908.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack