Watson v. Whitehead

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Watson v. Whitehead

78 S.E. 50, 12 Ga. App. 660

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 6, 1913

Docket4629

StatusPublished

This text of 78 S.E. 50 (Watson v. Whitehead) 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.

Bluebook

Watson v. Whitehead, 78 S.E. 50, 12 Ga. App. 660 (Ga. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

A plea of breach of warranty or failure of consideration does

not add to, take from, or vary the contract between the parties. Therefore, in a suit on a note given for rent, containing no limitation as tq warranty, parol evidence was admissible to show that the consideration of the note had failed, because the maker did not get the number, of acres for which the note was given, and also that the landlord, the payee in the note, had not performed his agreement to place on the rented laiid certain improvements. The court erred in excluding parol testimony offered to prove this defense to the note. Toller v. Hewitt, 12 Ga. App. 496 (77 S. E. 650) ; Baggs v. Funderburke, 11 Ga. App. 173 (74 S. E. 937); Burke v. Napier, 106 Ga. 327 (32 S. E. 134); Anderson v. Brown, 72 Ga. 713. Judgment reversed.

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

Hill, C. J.

A plea of breach of warranty or failure of consideration does

not add to, take from, or vary the contract between the parties. Therefore, in a suit on a note given for rent, containing no limitation as tq warranty, parol evidence was admissible to show that the consideration of the note had failed, because the maker did not get the number, of acres for which the note was given, and also that the landlord, the payee in the note, had not performed his agreement to place on the rented laiid certain improvements. The court erred in excluding parol testimony offered to prove this defense to the note. Toller v. Hewitt, 12 Ga. App. 496 (77 S. E. 650) ; Baggs v. Funderburke, 11 Ga. App. 173 (74 S. E. 937); Burke v. Napier, 106 Ga. 327 (32 S. E. 134); Anderson v. Brown, 72 Ga. 713. Judgment reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 S.E. 50, 12 Ga. App. 660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watson-v-whitehead-gactapp-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack