Ham v. Parkerson
68 Ga. 830
This text of 68 Ga. 830 (Ham v. Parkerson) 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
Ham v. Parkerson, 68 Ga. 830 (Ga. 1882).
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
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)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
68 Ga. 830, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ham-v-parkerson-ga-1882.