Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

204 Ga. 786

51 S.E.2d 855

Crow v. Bowers

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided February 16, 1949

Supreme Court of Georgia · decided 1949-02-16

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“(w)here it is sought to set aside a written instrument which is a full contract of release from all further claims, and not merely a receipt, parol evidence is not admissible to vary or alter its terms.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Henslee v. Houston

Relies on Burgamy v. Holton · Collier v. Mayflower Apartments Inc. · Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Smith

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1949-02-16

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently January 2006

9 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

801949195019601970198019902000decided

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 →

Atkinson, Presiding Justice.

¶1 1. Where a petition seeks cancellation of a written instrument and alleges that the instrument sought to be canceled was “a release from all further claims," in construing the petition most strongly against the pleader, which must be done, the instrument will be construed as a full contract of release, and not merely a receipt.

¶2 2. Where it is sought to set aside a written instrument which is a full contract of release from all further claims, and not merely a receipt, parol evidence is not admissible to vary or alter its terms. Walters v. Odom, 53 Ga. 286, 289; Southern Bell Telephone &c. Co. v. Smith, 129 Ga. 558 (59 S. E. 215); Pennsylvania Casualty Co. v. Thompson, 130 Ga. 766 (61 S. E. 829); Jewell v. Norrell, 66 Ga. App. 11 (4) (16 S. E. 2d, 797).

¶3 3. Where a liquidated debt, upon which there is no dispute as to the amount due, is agreed to be settled for less than its face value and the settlement is consumated by the payment of the amount agreed upon and the execution and delivery of a writing stating that it is “a release from all further claims,” this is an accord and satisfaction and an extinguishment of all liability therefor by the debtor. Code, § 20-1204; Tarver v. *787 Rankin, 3 Ga. 210; Brown v. Ayer, 24 Ga. 288; Tyler Cotton Press Co. v. Chevalier, 56 Ga. 494 (5); Burgamy v. Holton, 165 Ga. 384 (3) (141 S. E. 42); Collier v. Mayflower Apartments, 196 Ga. 419 (2) (26 S. E. 2d, 731).

No. 16521. February 16, 1949.

¶4 4. A petition, seeking the cancellation of the instrument above described, in which there was no sufficient allegation of fraud, or other grounds authorizing a cancellation, was subject to the general demurrer interposed thereto, and the trial court erred in overruling the same.

¶5 Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur. *788 M. G. Hicks, for plaintiff in error. James F. McNamara and Robert L. Royal, contra.
/204/ga/786 · .json · Public domain