Reviere v. Evans
This text of 29 S.E. 756 (Reviere v. Evans) 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.
Opinion
The headnote filed in this case requires no elaboration. It has often been held that the words “for value received,” in a promissory note, are ambiguous and open to explanation by parol. It is beyond doubt allowable for the defendant in an action upon such a note to set forth by a proper plea what was the real consideration, and allege facts showing that it failed in whole or in part. Permitting this can in no [171]*171sense be regarded as allowing the defendant to vary by parol the terms of a valid written instrument. Taking as true the allegations of the plea, it set forth a defense to the plaintiff’s action, and it was therefore error to strike it on the ground^ specified, viz.: “that it sought by parol to vary the contract sued on and add to its terms a condition not therein expressed.”
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
29 S.E. 756, 103 Ga. 169, 1897 Ga. LEXIS 384, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reviere-v-evans-ga-1897.