Legal Opinion
Toller v. Hewitt
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided March 18, 1913No. 4561PublishedCited by 11 opinions
Complaint; from city court of Jefferson—Judge Johns. November 22, 1912:
1Opinion of the CourtPottle, J.
1. Either want or failure of consideration may be shown in defense to an action on a promissory note, though the ñute be under seal. Baggs v. Funderburke, 11 Ga. App. 173 (74 S. E. 937).
2. A purchase-money note which purports to contain the terms of the sale can not be varied or added to by parol. Hence, where the purchaser of an article gives his note, and therein accepts a limited warranty and stipulates not to exact anything beyond, he will not be allowed to introduce parol proof of representations ■ or warranties not embraced in the note. But where a note given for the purchase-price of a…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Pryor v. Ludden & Bates Southern Music HouseSupreme Court of Georgia · 1910
- Baggs v. FunderburkeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1912
- Whigham v. Hall & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1911
- Anthony v. CodySupreme Court of Georgia · 1910
- Tygart v. SuttonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1910
3Cited by11 opinions
- Bond & Maxwell v. PerrinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1916
- Jones v. LawmanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1937
- Harrell v. HolmanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
- International Harvester Co. of America v. MorganCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
- Frick Co. v. LawsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.