Mill Wood & Coal Co. v. Flint River Cypress Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Action on contract; from city court of Albany — Judge Clayton Jones. June 16, 1914.
1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, J.
1. “The cardinal rule of construction [of contracts] is to ascertain the intention of the parties. If that intention be clear, and it contravenes no rule of law, and sufficient words be used to arrive at the intention, it shall be enforced irrespective of all technical or arbitrary rules of construction.” Civil Code, § 4266. In this case the contract itself, the conduct of the parties after it was executed, and all the at*637tendant circumstances (as shown in the petition and amendments thereto) leave little room for doubt that the intention of the parties was that both should be bound in the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Mutual Life Insurance v. DurdenCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1911
- McCaw Manufacturing Co. v. Felder & RountreeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- National Furnace Co. v. Keystone Manufacturing Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1884
- Emerson v. Pacific Coast & Norway Packing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
- Mendel v. Miller & SonsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bridges v. Home Guano Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1924
- Redman Development Corp. v. Piedmont Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1973
- Russell v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1948
- Stokes v. WalkerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
- La Grange Grocery Co. v. Lamborn & Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.