Method for creating binding contract through correspondence.

- Complete and binding contract may be made by means of epistolary correspondence, but this result is not accomplished until there has been a definite offer by one correspondent and an unequivocal acceptance of it by the other, without condition or variance of any kind. Parties must mutually assent to same thing in same sense. Robinson v. Weller, 81 Ga. 704, 8 S.E. 447 (1888); Harris v. Amoskeag Lumber Co., 97 Ga. 465, 25 S.E. 519 (1895).

Offer by mail adopts mail as agency for acceptance unless specified otherwise.

- Person who by mail sends to another an offer or proposal which requires only latter's acceptance or confirmation to create valid contract, and who says nothing as to how answer of acceptance or confirmation shall be communicated, nor that it shall take effect only upon actual receipt of acceptance by offerer, impliedly adopts mails as one's agency, and authorizes its use in transmission to one of acceptance. Rowntree Bros. v. Bush, 28 Ga. App. 376, 111 S.E. 217 (1922).

One making by mail an offer requiring only acceptance to create valid contract, without stating how acceptance shall be communicated, adopts the mails as one's agency, and authorizes transmission of acceptance by mail. E. Frederics, Inc. v. Felton Beauty Supply Co., 58 Ga. App. 320, 198 S.E. 324 (1938).

Contract for the construction of an underground piping system is "made" when the offer is accepted, because the acceptance, not delivery, constitutes the last act essential to the completion of the contract. General Tel. Co. v. Trimm, 706 F.2d 1117 (11th Cir. 1983).

When mail is agency for acceptance, contract complete upon mailing acceptance, although acceptance never received. E. Frederics, Inc. v. Felton Beauty Supply Co., 58 Ga. App. 320, 198 S.E. 324 (1938).

When offeree deposits the offeree's acceptance in mail, in envelope properly stamped and addressed to offerer, contract thereupon becomes complete and binding, without reference to whether or not acceptance actually reaches addressee. Rowntree Bros. v. Bush, 28 Ga. App. 376, 111 S.E. 217 (1922).

Presumption of receipt of letter properly addressed, stamped, and mailed is rebuttable.

- Rule that, where letter is written, properly addressed, stamped, and mailed, presumption arises that the letter was received by addressee, is merely prima facie, and may be successfully rebutted by uncontradicted evidence of addressee that addressee did not in fact receive the letter. Rowntree Bros. v. Bush, 28 Ga. App. 376, 111 S.E. 217 (1922).

Cited in Bryant v. Booze, 55 Ga. 438 (1875); Georgia R.R. & Banking Co. v. Smith, 83 Ga. 626, 10 S.E. 235 (1889); Home Ins. Co. v. Chattahoochee Lumber Co., 126 Ga. 334, 55 S.E. 11 (1906); City of Royston v. Littrell Eng'r Co., 87 Ga. App. 903, 75 S.E.2d 678 (1953); Borg-Warner Health Prods., Inc. v. May, 154 Ga. App. 482, 268 S.E.2d 770 (1980); Amwest Surety Ins. Co. v. RA-LIN & Assocs., 216 Ga. App. 526, 455 S.E.2d 106 (1995); Moore v. Emery (In re Am. Steel Prod., Inc.), 203 Bankr. 504 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 1996); Popham v. Landmark Am. Ins. Co., 340 Ga. App. 603, 798 S.E.2d 257 (2017).

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 17 Am. Jur. 2d, Contracts, §§ 25, 29, 31, 35, 48 et seq., 57, 60, 67.

C.J.S.

- 17 C.J.S., Contracts, §§ 33, 36, 52, 57. 17A C.J.S., Contracts, §§ 356, 374, 580, 592, 597, 624.

ALR.

- Time and place of consummation of contract on acceptance by telegraph of offer, 47 A.L.R. 159.

Time when offer or proposition is mailed, or when it is received through mail as commencement of period allowed for acceptance, 72 A.L.R. 1214.

Withdrawal of, or right to withdraw, letter from mail as affecting consummation of contract, 92 A.L.R. 1062.

Character and validity of written instrument as a contract for sale of goods as affected by election or option in respect of subject-mater, 105 A.L.R. 1100.

Attempted revocation of offer by letter mailed or telegram filed before, but not received until after, letter or telegram of acceptance was mailed or filed, 125 A.L.R. 989.

Applicability and application, in civil case, of presumption of addressee's receipt of telegram, 24 A.L.R.3d 1434.