Gunter v. Edmonds

101 S.E. 118, 149 Ga. 518, 1919 Ga. LEXIS 307
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedNovember 15, 1919
DocketNo. 1463
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 101 S.E. 118 (Gunter v. Edmonds) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gunter v. Edmonds, 101 S.E. 118, 149 Ga. 518, 1919 Ga. LEXIS 307 (Ga. 1919).

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

Equity will not reform a written contract because of mistake on the part of the complaining parties as to the contents of the writing, and because of fraud alleged to have been practiced by the other party in procuring the scrivener who drafted the written contract, and in whom the complaining parties had entire confidence, to omit therefrom a stipulation alleged to have been agreed upon, no fiduciary or confidential relation existing between the parties, and no sufficient excuse appearing why the complaining parties did not read the contract. Weaver v. Roberson, 134 Ga. 149 (67 S. E. 662).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Atkinson, J., absent.

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

Related

Walker v. B. E. Robuck, Inc.
93 S.E.2d 178 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1956)
McCommons v. Greene County
184 S.E. 897 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1936)
Bentley v. Barlow
173 S.E. 707 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1934)
Mayo Arcade Corporation v. Bonded Floors Co.
41 S.W.2d 1104 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
101 S.E. 118, 149 Ga. 518, 1919 Ga. LEXIS 307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gunter-v-edmonds-ga-1919.