Legal Opinion · Dissent

Yeazel v. Burger King Corp.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided November 23, 1999No. A99A1526Published

1DissentMcMurray, Presiding Judge

I fully agree the trial court erred in refusing to consider parol evidence of an alleged mutual mistake. Nevertheless, I would affirm under the “right for any reason” rule, because the intervening equity of a bona fide purchaser for value precludes reformation of this lease. Furthermore, the voluntary payment rule does not bar recovery of alleged overpayments made during the pendency of this action. I therefore respectfully dissent from the judgment of reversal.

Plaintiff-appellee Burger King Corporation (“BKC”) brought this action against defendants-appellants Rita D. Yeazel and Jack H.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Green v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
  2. Georgia Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance v. WallSupreme Court of Georgia · 1978
  3. Malette v. WrightSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
  4. Sheldon v. HargroseSupreme Court of Georgia · 1957
  5. Amwest Surety Insurance v. Ra-Lin & Associates, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1995

6 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