Hinkle v. Hixon

113 S.E. 805, 154 Ga. 193, 1922 Ga. LEXIS 328
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided September 16, 1922·No. No. 2986·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinions

Per Curiam.

1. Fraud voids all contracts. Civil Code (1910), § 4254. 2. Parol evidence is admissible to show that a writing was either originally void or has subsequently become such. Civil Code (1910), § 5790.

3. The amendment to the plaintiff’s petition did not set forth a new cause of action, and was properly allowed by the court.

4. The petition set forth a cause of action, and the court did not err in overruling the demurrer thereto on any of the grounds thereof.

Judgment affirmed.

All'the -Justices concur, except Beele, P. J., dissenting.

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

Hinkle v. Hixon, 113 S.E. 805, 154 Ga. 193, 1922 Ga. LEXIS 328 (Ga. 1922).

113 S.E. 805 (Hinkle v. Hixon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hall v. Westmoreland, Hall & Bryan
182 S.E.2d 539 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1971)
Altman v. Moses
37 S.E.2d 236 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1946)
Hinkle v. Hixon
136 S.E. 280 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1926)