Legal Opinion
Love v. Nixon
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided October 6, 1950No. 33184PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSutton, C. J.
“Fraud may exist from misrepresentation by either party, made with design to deceive, or which does actually deceive the other party; and in the latter case such misrepresentation renders the sale voidable at the election of the injured party, though the party making it was not aware that his statement was false. Such misrepresentation may be perpetrated by acts as well as words, and by any artifices designed to mislead. A misrepresentation not acted on is not ground for annulling a contract.” Code, § 96-202. But, “When the means of knowledge are at hand and equally available to both parties…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- City of Moultrie v. Schofield's Sons Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1909
- Miller v. RobertsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1911
- Summerour v. PappaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Fay & Eagan Co. v. Dudley & SonsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
- Wylly v. GazanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1883
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Atlanta Americana Motor Hotel Corp. v. Sika Chemical Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
- Lorick v. Na-Churs Plant Food Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1979
- Atlanta Tallow Co. v. John W. Eshelman & Sons, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1964
- United States ex rel. Meva Corp. v. Northeast Construction Co.District Court, S.D. Georgia · 1969
- Anderson v. RH MacY & Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1960
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.