Lloyd v. Redford

Supreme Court of Georgia

Lloyd v. Redford

97 S.E. 523, 148 Ga. 575, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 446

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided November 16, 1918·No. No. 1010·Published·Cited by 17 cases

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

“Where specific performance is sought for the enforce„ment of a parol contract for the sale of lands, such contract and the terms thereof should be established so clearly, strongly, and satisfactorily as to leave no reasonable doubt as to the agreement.” Printup v. Mitchell, 17 Ga. 558 (63 Am. D. 258); Redman v. Mays, 129 Ga. 435 (59 S. E. 212); Gordon v. Spellman, 148 Ga. 394 (96 S. E. 1006). The evidence in this case, in clearness, strength, and precision as to the contract, failed entirely to measure up to this standard, and the verdict must be set aside.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Gilbert, J.

“Where specific performance is sought for the enforce„ment of a parol contract for the sale of lands, such contract and the terms thereof should be established so clearly, strongly, and satisfactorily as to leave no reasonable doubt as to the agreement.” Printup v. Mitchell, 17 Ga. 558 (63 Am. D. 258); Redman v. Mays, 129 Ga. 435 (59 S. E. 212); Gordon v. Spellman, 148 Ga. 394 (96 S. E. 1006). The evidence in this case, in clearness, strength, and precision as to the contract, failed entirely to measure up to this standard, and the verdict must be set aside.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

Lloyd v. Redford, 97 S.E. 523, 148 Ga. 575, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 446 (Ga. 1918).

Pincite

97 S.E. 523 (Lloyd v. Redford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related