Legal Opinion

Murry v. Lett

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided April 13, 1964No. 22386PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Quillian, Justice.

“Where parties depart from the terms of a contract and receive or pay money under the departure, reasonable notice must be given to the other party of the intention to rely upon the exact terms of the contract before there can be any recovery for failure to comply with its exact terms. Until notice, such departure is a quasi new agreement.” Verner v. McLarty, 213 Ga. 472, 475 (1) (99 SE2d 890), and cases therein cited. A purchaser who acquires a note after default of an installment “is not a holder in due course, but takes the in-

strument with notice of its dishonor, and…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Lefkoff v. SicroSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939
  2. Miller v. WatsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1912
  3. Verner v. McLartySupreme Court of Georgia · 1957
  4. Burnam v. WilkersonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1962
  5. Brown v. ParksSupreme Court of Georgia · 1930

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Reese v. Ideal Realty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
  2. Empire Mortgage & Investment Co. v. DunawaySupreme Court of Georgia · 1967
  3. Murry v. LettSupreme Court of Georgia · 1966
  4. Frandson v. Oasis Petroleum North America, LLCDistrict Court, D. North Dakota · 2012
  5. Reese v. Ideal Realty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1974

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

Powered by the Exa API