Cross v. Cook, 56645
| Decision Date | 23 October 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 56645,56645 |
| Citation | 250 S.E.2d 28,147 Ga.App. 695 |
| Parties | CROSS v. COOK et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Sartain & Carey, Jack M. Carey, Gainesville, for appellant.
Smith & Weaver, Rees R. Smith, Atlanta, for appellees.
1. Herndon v. Herndon, 227 Ga. 781, 783, 183 S.E.2d 386, 388 (1971). For such an agreement to be binding on the parties it should be clear that it is full and complete, covers all issues, and is understood by all litigants concerned. "A compromise, when made full and complete, puts an end to the subject matter of controversy." Parker v. Riley, 21 Ga. 427 (1857), and see Kapiloff v. Askin Stores, Inc., 202 Ga. 292, 42 S.E.2d 724 (1947).
2. An oral compromise, where denied by one of the parties, creates an issue of fact, and it will not be adopted by the court unless it appears that the terms were understood and agreed to by those concerned. Here defendant's counsel proposed and plaintiffs' counsel accepted that the sum of $5,500 be paid to the plaintiffs. While these facts are not denied, it is the contention of plaintiffs' attorney as stated in the motion to reset the case on the trial calendar that all parties understood, when the offer of $5,500 was made, that this was in addition to approximately $4,200 which it was understood the defendant's insurer would pay direct to the plaintiffs rather than to plaintiffs' insurer on the latter's subrogation claim, but the plaintiffs were later informed the claim would have to be made direct with the defendant's insurance company. Apparently this was discussed before the judge, since his order states that the matter Apparently also facts were presented to the trial court on which this decision was made. The burden is upon the movant to show on appeal that the findings of fact are clearly erroneous. Michael v. McAdams, 240 Ga. 65, 239 S.E.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lewis v. State
...as an officer of the court is entitled to some weight and may sometimes properly substitute for evidence, see Cross v. Cook, 147 Ga.App. 695, 696(3), 250 S.E.2d 28 (1978), the generalized and conclusory statements in this case about the nature and substance of the testimony Colman will offe......
-
Landry v. Walsh, A17A0449
...counsel's assertion regarding the total fees incurred by Walsh as evidence supporting his fee request, see Cross v. Cook, 147 Ga.App. 695, 696 (3), 250 S.E.2d 28 (1978) ("Attorneys are officers of the court and their statements in their place, if not objected to, serve the same function as ......
-
Matter of Cotton, Bankruptcy No. 89-51386.
...of fact, and it will not be adopted by the court unless it appears that the terms were understood and agreed to by those concerned. 250 S.E.2d at 28-29. In Glazer v. J.C. Bradford and Co.,3 the former Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Under Georgia law, an attorney is cloaked with apparent aut......
-
Harbin v. State
...139; Allen v. State, 137 Ga.App. 755, 757(6), 224 S.E.2d 834; Morris v. State, 228 Ga. 39, 49(11), 184 S.E.2d 82; Cross v. Cook, 147 Ga.App. 695, 696(3), 250 S.E.2d 28. Defendant contends here by brief that one of the parties to the deal or agreement might well have impeached the other. Nev......