Legal Opinion

Briesenick v. Dimond

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided January 17, 1925No. 15854PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.

1. Under' repeated rulings of the courts of this State, where a purchaser of real estate who inspected it was not prevented by fraud on the part of the seller from inspecting it properly, or from making any other inquiry or investigation with respect thereto, and failed to exercise diligence in doing so, he can not have an abatement of the purchase price because of false representations of the seller with respect to its character or value, although in buying the land ho may have acted upon misrepresentations of the seller touching these matters, under an express assurance from the seller that…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Summerour v. PappaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
  2. Fenley v. MoodySupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
  3. Southern Railway Co. v. CunninghamSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
  4. Thompson v. BoyceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1890
  5. Macon Railway & Light Co. v. ViningSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Elliott v. MarshallSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934
  2. Norris v. HartCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1946
  3. Stovall v. RumbleCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1944
  4. Collier v. SinkoeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
  5. Georgia Fruit Growers Inc. v. VaughnCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API