Legal Opinion

Cummings v. Cummings

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided January 20, 1954No. 34951PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGardner, P. J.

1. It is the cardinal and fundamental rule that in construing contracts the entire writing is to be taken into consideration to ascertain the intent of the parties and, if the same can be ascertained, that intention should govern. Bridges v. Home Guano Co., 33 Ga. App. 305, 309 (125 S. E. 872), and cit. .The court, in its decision of the law of this case, evidently-followed and applied this principle, which is correct and was applicable. The court did not err in finding for the plaintiff because the court did not apply the principle that the exhibit attached to the contract dealt with was…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bridges v. Home Guano Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1924
  2. Whitney v. HaganCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1941
  3. Johnson v. YanceySupreme Court of Georgia · 1856
  4. Brewer v. BaxterSupreme Court of Georgia · 1870
  5. Epps v. DeanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1859

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Union Commerce Leasing Corp. v. Beef 'N Burgundy, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
  2. Bress v. Keep-Safe Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
  3. Indian Trail Village, Inc. v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1979
  4. Twin Oaks Associates v. DeKalb Venture, Ltd.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1989
  5. Mitchell v. MitchellSupreme Court of Georgia · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API