J. W. Goldsmith Inc. v. Vrooman
This text of 23 S.E.2d 504 (J. W. Goldsmith Inc. v. Vrooman) 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.
Opinions
Where a contract for the sale of an automobile contains the provision that “no agreement, promise, representation, statement or warranty, whether oral or written, express or implied, shall be binding on the holder unless expressly contained herein,” the purchaser can not recover of the seller damages allegedly arising from false and fraudulent representations concerning the automobile, which allegedly induced the execution of the contract of sale, where there was no fraud, accident, or mistake as a result of which the buyer signed the contract without knowing its contents. Waits v. Lumpkin, 59 Ga. App. 416 (1 S. E. 2d, 72), and cit. A verdict was demanded for the seller and the court erred in overruling the motion for new trial. It is not necessary to consider the special assignments of error.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
23 S.E.2d 504, 68 Ga. App. 528, 1942 Ga. App. LEXIS 164, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-w-goldsmith-inc-v-vrooman-gactapp-1942.