Mosquito Creek Farms, Inc. v. Whigam

Supreme Court of Georgia

Mosquito Creek Farms, Inc. v. Whigam

491 S.E.2d 359, 268 Ga. 530, 97 Fulton County D. Rep. 3696, 1997 Ga. LEXIS 617

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedOctober 6, 1997

DocketS97A0912

StatusPublished

This text of 491 S.E.2d 359 (Mosquito Creek Farms, Inc. v. Whigam) 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

Mosquito Creek Farms, Inc. v. Whigam, 491 S.E.2d 359, 268 Ga. 530, 97 Fulton County D. Rep. 3696, 1997 Ga. LEXIS 617 (Ga. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Sears, Justice.

Pursuant to a written contract, the appellant, Mosquito Creek Farms, Inc. (hereinafter “MCF”), executed a warranty deed and conveyed 100 acres of land to the appellee, Lock Wood Whigam III. A specific peanut allotment had been assigned to the 100 acres, but neither the written contract nor the deed mentioned the allotment. The issue raised by this appeal is whether MCF can enforce an oral agreement that MCF alleges the parties entered at the time of the sale that effectively would have reserved part of the allotment for MCF. The trial court ruled that the alleged oral agreement could not be enforced, and granted summary judgment to Whigam. We affirm. Because the deed in question passed title to the 100 acres in fee simple, and because the 100 acres had been assigned a peanut allotment, the rule is that the peanut allotment passed with the farm under the deed.¹ Because the alleged prior oral agreement would contradict Whigam’s title by altering the peanut allotment that he would be entitled to under the deed, the trial court correctly ruled that the alleged oral agreement is unenforceable.²

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. [531]*531Decided October 6, 1997 — Reconsideration denied October 31, 1997. Walter E. Baker, for appellant. Walters, Davis & Pujadas, Thomas E. Pujadas, for appellee.

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

Sears, Justice.

Pursuant to a written contract, the appellant, Mosquito Creek Farms, Inc. (hereinafter “MCF”), executed a warranty deed and conveyed 100 acres of land to the appellee, Lock Wood Whigam III. A specific peanut allotment had been assigned to the 100 acres, but neither the written contract nor the deed mentioned the allotment. The issue raised by this appeal is whether MCF can enforce an oral agreement that MCF alleges the parties entered at the time of the sale that effectively would have reserved part of the allotment for MCF. The trial court ruled that the alleged oral agreement could not be enforced, and granted summary judgment to Whigam. We affirm. Because the deed in question passed title to the 100 acres in fee simple, and because the 100 acres had been assigned a peanut allotment, the rule is that the peanut allotment passed with the farm under the deed.¹ Because the alleged prior oral agreement would contradict Whigam’s title by altering the peanut allotment that he would be entitled to under the deed, the trial court correctly ruled that the alleged oral agreement is unenforceable.²

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. [531]*531Decided October 6, 1997 — Reconsideration denied October 31, 1997. Walter E. Baker, for appellant. Walters, Davis & Pujadas, Thomas E. Pujadas, for appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

491 S.E.2d 359, 268 Ga. 530, 97 Fulton County D. Rep. 3696, 1997 Ga. LEXIS 617, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mosquito-creek-farms-inc-v-whigam-ga-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack