Legal Opinion

Commercial Mortgage & Finance Corp. v. Greenwich Savings Bank

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 28, 1965No. 41443PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Bell, Presiding Judge.

Defendant contends that the agreements in question were so lacking in mutuality as to be unenforceable. “Parties who labor under no disabilities may contract on their own terms, and if there is no fraud or mistake, and the terms are not illegal or contrary to public policy, they must abide the contract . . . there is nothing illegal or extraordinary in undertaking to do a thing or furnish an article the acceptance of which shall depend on the satisfaction of the other contracting party . . . [but in terminating the contract] the promisor, whose satisfaction is thus made…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Mackenzie v. MinisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909
  2. Paley v. Barton Savings and Loan Assn.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1964
  3. Herzog v. RossSupreme Court of Missouri · 1946
  4. Rome Industrial Insurance v. EidsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1912
  5. Fried v. Portis Bros. Hat Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1930

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. MacDougald Construction Co. v. State Highway DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1972
  2. Flint Davis v. Sears, Roebuck and Company and Bruce MasonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1989
  3. Kadner v. ShieldsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
  4. Considine Co. of Georgia, Inc. v. Turner Communications Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
  5. Clayton McLendon, Inc. v. McCarthyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1971

16 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