Wade v. Ballard
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtFelton, J.
Where the consideration of a contract is stated merely by way of recital it may ordinarily be inquired into, but if it is contractual in nature and set forth as part of the terms and conditions of the agreement the statement of the consideration may not be contradicted under the guise of an inquiry into the consideration. We cite a few of the cases enunciating this principle: Wellmaker v. Wheatley, 123 Ga. 201 (2) (51 S. E. 436); Burke v. Napier. 106 Ga. 327, 329 (32 S. E. 134); Brousseau v. Jacobs Pharmacy Co., 147 Ga. 185, 189 (93 S. E. 293); 100 A. L. R. 18n; Code, § 38-501, Code Arm. §…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Wellmaker v. WheatleySupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Brosseau v. Jacobs' Pharmacy Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1917
- Roberts v. Investors Savings Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1922
- Burke v. NapierSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
- Dendy v. Gamble & CopelandSupreme Court of Georgia · 1877
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- TIE Communications, Inc. v. KoppSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Jackson v. Commercial Credit Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1954
- Kirkendohl v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961