Legal Opinion
Mulkey v. Spicer
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided July 10, 1947No. 15891PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Wyatt, Justice.
1. It is strongly urged that the plaintiff in error is not entitled to have the instrument in question reformed for the reason that it does not appear that he was diligent. It is contended that, if he could read, he should have read.
In Green v. Johnson, 153 Ga. 738 (113 S. E. 402), Mr. Justice Hines, speaking for the court, collected and differentiated in a very able manner the authorities up to that time on the question of diligence in a case of this kind. After discussing at length the authorities, the court expressed its conclusion in that case as follows: “Equity will not…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Green v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
- Werner v. RawsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1892
- Steadham v. CobbSupreme Court of Georgia · 1938
- W. P. Brown & Sons Lumber Co. v. EcholsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1946
- Hill v. AgnewSupreme Court of Georgia · 1945
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Williams v. HudgensSupreme Court of Georgia · 1962
- Thornton v. ThorntonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1953
- Brooks v. Southern Clays, Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1964
- Flagg v. HedrickSupreme Court of Georgia · 1959