McCrary & Co. v. Austell, Inman & Co.

Supreme Court of Georgia

McCrary & Co. v. Austell, Inman & Co.

46 Ga. 450

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJuly 15, 1872

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 46 Ga. 450 (McCrary & Co. v. Austell, Inman & Co.) 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

McCrary & Co. v. Austell, Inman & Co., 46 Ga. 450 (Ga. 1872).

Pincite

Opinion

Montgomery, Judge.

We think the facts of this case show that there was “an honest mistake of the law as to the effect of the instrument on the part of both contracting parties,” and that “ such mistake operates as a gross injustice to one, and gives an un[452]*452conscious advantage to the other.” The case is, therefore, relievable in equity: Code, section 3067. Equity having acquired jurisdiction to reform, will retain it to foreclose the mortgage.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Montgomery, Judge.

We think the facts of this case show that there was “an honest mistake of the law as to the effect of the instrument on the part of both contracting parties,” and that “ such mistake operates as a gross injustice to one, and gives an un[452]*452conscious advantage to the other.” The case is, therefore, relievable in equity: Code, section 3067. Equity having acquired jurisdiction to reform, will retain it to foreclose the mortgage.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

46 Ga. 450, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccrary-co-v-austell-inman-co-ga-1872.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack