Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

110 Ga. 315

Dickey v. Grice

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided February 27, 1900

Supreme Court of Georgia · decided 1900-02-27

<p>Complaint. Before Judge Smith. Wilcox superior court. March term, 1899.</p>

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“One who is a stranger to a deed or other instrument in writing is not bound by any recitals of fact therein contained, and accordingly has the right to contradict the same by parol evidence and show that the writing does not express the real truth of the transaction to which it relates.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Knight v. Lowery

Relies on Yahoola River & Cane Creek Hydraulic Hose Mining Co. v. Irby · First National Bank v. Cody · Hanks v. Phillips

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1900-02-27

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 2009

8 state decisions

2019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Little, J.

¶11. One who is a stranger to a deed or other instrument in writing is not bound by any recitals of fact therein contained, and accordingly has the right to contradict the same by parol evidence and show that the writing does not express the real truth of the transaction to which it relates. Hanks v. Phillips, 39 Ga. 550; Yahoola Mining Co. v. Irby, 40 Ga. 479; Lamar v. Turner, 48 Ga. 329; Cruger v. Tucker, 69 Ga. 557; First National Bank v. Cody, 93 Ga. 127; Heard v. Nix, 96 Ga. 54.

¶22. A written request to charge is not too late if presented “ at any time before the jury retires to consider of their verdict.” Civil Code, § 5479. Refusing to give such request is not, however, necessarily cause for a new trial, when it merely embraces a statement of a simple issue of fact which the jury must have understood was involved in the case, and when it does not appear that this issue was not submitted to them by the judge in other and appropriate language.

¶33. The verdict was, supported by sufficient evidence, and there was no abuse of discretion in denying a new trial.

¶4Judgment afflrmed.

All the Justices concurring.
/110/ga/315 · .json · Public domain