O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 23-2-23 (2019)

Mistake of law in instrument by agent

✓ 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

A mistake of law by the draftsman or other agent, by which the contract, as executed, does not fulfill or violates the manifest intention of the parties to the agreement, may be relieved in equity.

History

Orig. Code 1863, § 3056; Code 1868, § 3068; Code 1873, § 3123; Code 1882, § 3123; Civil Code 1895,

§ 3980; Civil Code 1910, § 4577; Code 1933, § 37-205.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Equity will relieve against mutual mistake, but only at the instance of a complainant who moves with reasonable diligence. What is a reasonable time must necessarily depend upon the peculiar facts and environments of the particular case. Parker v. Fisher, 207 Ga. 3, 59 S.E.2d 715 (1950). Standing to seek reformation of liability contract. - In certifying certain questions to the Georgia Supreme Court, the federal Court of Appeals concluded that it is an open question of Georgia law whether a person injured by a municipality has a beneficial interest in the municipality’s liability contract sufficient to provide standing to seek reformation. Florida Int’l Indem. Co. v. City of Metter, 952 F.2d 1297 (11th Cir. 1992), aff ’d, 984 F.2d 1138 (11th Cir. 1993). Allegations of inadequate description by draftsman states case for reformation. - When a petition is brought by assignee for reformation of a written lease and option agreement, alleging a valuable consideration, and that permanent improvements had been made on the property involved, and that an alleged

inadequate description of the property had been made by mistake of the draftsman, it having been the intention of the parties that the description contended for be inserted in the agreement, and further alleging that unless so reformed an unconscionable advantage would be acquired by the defendant, such allegations state a case for reformation of the lease and option agreement. Martin v. Oakhurst Dev. Corp., 197 Ga. 288, 29 S.E.2d 179 (1944). A petition for reformation of a written contract will lie when by mistake of the scrivener and by oversight of the parties, the writing does not embody or fully express the real contract of the parties. McLoon v. McLoon, 220 Ga. 18, 136 S.E.2d 740 (1964). Cited in Bender v. Randall Bros., 189 Ga. 197, 5 S.E.2d 889 (1939); Gibbs v. H.T. Henning Co., 189 Ga. 675, 7 S.E.2d 238 (1940); Redmond v. Sinclair Ref. Co., 204 Ga. 699, 51 S.E.2d 409 (1949); Sheldon v. Hargrose, 213 Ga. 672, 100 S.E.2d 898 (1957); Flagg v. Hedrick, 215 Ga. 16, 108 S.E.2d 703 (1959); Robinson v. Wright, 217 Ga. 199, 121 S.E.2d 640 (1961); Seaboard Constr. Co. v. Clifton, 121 Ga. App. 247, 173 S.E.2d 436 (1970).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 27 Am. Jur. 2d, Equity, §§ 35, 36. C.J.S. - 30 C.J.S., Equity, § 44 et seq.

ALR. - Relief in equity from mistake of law, 75 A.L.R. 896.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1997–2022 · leading case: Yeazel v. Burger King Corp., 526 S.E.2d 112 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Yeazel v. Burger King Corp., 526 S.E.2d 112 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 4× “The uncontradicted evidence demonstrates the intent of the original parties to the 1985 lease amendment was to include an overriding minimum base rent of $4,000 per month.”

Kent v. Ao White, 559 S.E.2d 731 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “Kent to this day denies such tortious conduct and contends that he and White had an understanding that amounted to a contingent contract that White would be paid only if Kent won the case in which White testified.”

Superior Ins. v. Dawkins, 494 S.E.2d 208 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 23-2-22 provides: “An honest mistake of the law as to the effect of an instrument on the part of both contracting parties, when the mistake operates as a gross injustice to one and gives an unconscionable advantage to the other, may be relieved in equity.”

Cistola v. Daniel, 598 S.E.2d 535 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “See generally OCGA § 23-2-23. But this argument mischaracterizes Daniel’s fraud claim, which does not rely solely upon a failure to disclose.”

U.S. Bank, Nat'l Ass'n as Tr. of the Cabana Series IV Trust v. Carrington Mortg. Servs., LLC (Ga. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “302 (2) ( 175 SE 642 ) (1934) (equity permits reformation of a deed); OCGA § 23-2-23 (“A mistake of law by the draftsman or other agent, by which the contract, as 8 executed, does not fulfill or violates the manifest intention of the parties to the agreement, may be relieved in…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.