Legal Opinion

Jewell v. Norrell

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided October 1, 1941No. 29143PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMacIntyre, J.

“Parol contemporaneous evidence is inadmissible generally to contradict or vary the terms of a valid written instrument.” (Italics ours.) Code, § 38-501. “Parol evidence shall be admissible to show that the writing was either originally void [not valid] or subsequently became so.” (Brackets ours.) Code, § 38-503. “All contemporaneous writings shall be admissible to explain each other; and parol evidence shall be admissible to explain all ambiguities, both latent and patent.” Code, § 38-502. “Receipts for money are always only prima facie evidence of payment, and may be denied or explained by…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Chicago Building & Manufacturing Co. v. ButlerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1913
  2. Branan v. LeeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
  3. Ramsey-Fender Motor Co. v. ChapmanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
  4. Citizens Bank v. HallSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934
  5. Marietta Savings Bank v. JanesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1881

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Owens v. Service Fire InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1954
  2. Eastern Motor Co. v. LavenderCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1943
  3. Crow v. BowersSupreme Court of Georgia · 1949
  4. McWane Cast Iron Pipe Co. v. BarrettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1945

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

Powered by the Exa API