Legal Opinion

Hennon v. Gresham

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided June 11, 1943No. 14550PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Grice, Justice.

If the plaintiff has a case, it is because of the oral agreement set up in his amendment, since the writing signed by the parties lacks at least one vital essential, to wit, a definite description of the land, or at least a key to its identification. Douglass v. Bunn, 110 Ga. 159 (35 S. E. 339); Tippins v. Phillips, 123 Ga. 415 (51 S. E. 410). There is no prayer to reform it, even if it be conceded that the petition contains sufficient averments to authorize reformation. The oral contract was of a dual nature. It provided that Gresham would rent the land to Hennon for a certain…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Tippins v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
  2. Neely v. SheppardSupreme Court of Georgia · 1938
  3. Douglass v. BunnSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Smith v. CoxSupreme Court of Georgia · 1981
  2. Grist v. FosterSupreme Court of Georgia · 1980
  3. Walls v. SavageSupreme Court of Georgia · 1979

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API