O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 13-4-3 (2019)

Alteration of written contract - Requirement of preliminary proof as to material alteration

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

If the contract is not set forth as the basis of the action, so as to require a denial under oath, an alteration in a material part requires explanation before it can be admitted as evidence. This preliminary proof shall be submitted to the court.

History

(Orig. Code 1863, § 2795; Code 1868, § 2803; Code 1873, § 2854; Code 1882, § 2854; Civil Code 1895, § 3704; Civil Code 1910, § 4298; Code 1933, § 20-804.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS O.C.G.A. § 13-4-3 inapplicable to changes made prior to execution. - Law refers to alterations made after instrument has been executed. The law has no reference to any change made prior to that event. They are not, in fact, alterations, if made before. Thrasher v. Anderson, 45 Ga. 538 (1872). Alterations, though apparent on face, are ordinarily presumed to have been made prior to execution. Thrasher v. Anderson, 45 Ga. 538 (1872).

Plaintiff must explain any alteration on face when plea of non est factum filed. - It is incumbent on plaintiff to explain any alteration on face of note when plea of non est factum has been filed. This statute was not intended to repeal the common-law rule of evidence in such cases by implication. Wheat v. Arnold, 36 Ga. 479 (1867). Cited in Wheat v. Arnold, 36 Ga. 479 (1867).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 29 Am. Jur. 2d, Evidence, § 145.

C.J.S. - 17A C.J.S., Contracts, §§ 577, 607, 628.