Legal Opinion

Wynn v. First National Bank

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided January 12, 1933No. 8978PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

1. “A bill of exceptions will not be dismissed because in the

assignment of-error it is stated that the ‘defendant excepted and now excepts,’ etc., where from the whole bill of exceptions it is apparent that the word ‘defendant’ was inadvertently used for ‘plaintiffs.’” Thompson v. Simmons, 139 Ga. 845 (3) (78 S. E. 419). Applying the principle just stated, the motion to dismiss the bill of exceptions is overruled.

2. A party to a contract who can read must read, or show a legal excuse for not doing so. Fraud which would relieve a party who could read must be such as prevents him from reading.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Stoddard Manufacturing Co. v. AdamsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
  2. Walton Guano Co. v. CopelanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
  3. Rounsaville & Brother v. Leonard Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1907
  4. Capps v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1908
  5. Georgia Medicine Co. v. Hyman & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1903

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Lewis v. FoySupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
  2. Early v. KentSupreme Court of Georgia · 1959
  3. Gossett & Sons v. WilderCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1933
  4. Ansley v. Forest Services, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
  5. Scott v. GillisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1947

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

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

Powered by the Exa API