Reformation and execution of contract in case of mistake distinguished
Applied in 2 court decisions — leading case Metlife Life & Annuity Co. of Conn. v. Akpele (2018)
Most recently applied in MetLife and Annuity Company of Connecticut v. Uzo Akpele (March 2018)
— Orig
A distinction exists between reforming a contract and executing a contract in case of mistake. To authorize the former, the court shall be satisfied by the evidence that the mistake was mutual; but the court may refuse to act in the latter case if the mistake is confined to the party refusing to execute.
§ 3981; Civil Code 1910, § 4578; Code 1933, § 37-208.
Current official text: Official Code of Georgia Annotated (LexisNexis). Digitized from the Internet Archive scan of the OCGA. Reproduced from public-domain Georgia statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.