Ham v. Parkerson
68 Ga. 830
Opinion
While a written contract cannot be altered by parol, yet if its execution was the result of fraud, accident or mistake, such fact may be pleaded and proved by parol in avoidance thereof.
.Held, that, to a suit on the bond such facts might be pleaded and proved by parol, and would constitute a good defence. 54 Ga., 289; 52 Ib., 149; 56 Ib., 31, 32; 59 Ib., 850.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Ham v. Parkerson, 68 Ga. 830 (Ga. 1882).
68 Ga. 830 (Ham v. Parkerson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Altman v. Moses
37 S.E.2d 236 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1946)
Elliott v. Marshall
176 S.E. 770 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1934)
White & Hamilton Lumber Co. v. Foster
122 S.E. 29 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1924)
Loyless v. Hesse Envelope & Lithographing Co.
74 S.E. 90 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1912)
Branan v. Lee
60 S.E. 325 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1908)
Dolvin v. American Harrow Co.
54 S.E. 706 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1906)
Barrie v. Miller
30 S.E. 840 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1898)
Philman v. Marshall
29 S.E. 598 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1897)
Willis v. Rivers
7 S.E. 90 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1888)