Eller & Heyward, Inc. v. Jackson
Decision Date | 17 April 1968 |
Docket Number | No. 43573,No. 2,43573,2 |
Citation | 162 S.E.2d 238,117 Ga.App. 753 |
Parties | ELLER & HEYWARD, INC. v. J. L. JACKSON |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Hatcher, Meyerson, Oxford & Irvin, Henry M. Hatcher, Jr., Atlanta, for appellant.
Greer & Murray, Richard G. Greer, Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
The plaintiff, a subcontractor, sued the general contractor for the unpaid balance of the amount allegedly due him under the subcontract. After a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, the defendant appeals.
The subcontract provided:
There is no dispute that the subcontractor did not install gutters and downspouts. The subcontractor contends that the contract required him to install a roof according to the plans and specifications, and since these did not show gutters and downspouts that were not required by the contract. The contractor contends that by the plain language of the provision that the subcontractor shall install gutters and downspouts the contract unambiguously required that the subcontractor install them, even though they were not shown on the plans and specifications, and that this should be determined as a matter of law by the court.
'The true rule relative to the duty of the court to construe (a contract) is * * * 'Construction of ambiguous contracts is the duty of the court, and it is only after application thereto of the pertinent rules of construction, and they remain ambiguous, that extrinsic evidence is admissible to explain the ambiguity.' * * * although there is ambiguity in a contract it raises no jury question unless the ambiguity remains unresolved after application of applicable rules of construction.' Farm Supply Co. of Albany, Inc. v. Cook, 116 Ga.App. 814, 816, 159 S.E.2d 128, 130.
It appears that this case was tried on the theory that there was an issue of fact as to the meaning of the contract, and this issue was presented to the jury to be resolved by determining the intent of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
H. W. Ivey Const. Co. v. Transamerica Ins. Co.
...of the contract was a matter of law for determination by the court. This he cannot successfully do. Eller & Heyward, Inc. v. Jackson, 117 Ga.App. 753, 162 S.E.2d 238. He must stand or fall upon the position taken in the trial court. Kenimer v. Ward Wight Realty Co., 219 Ga. 275, 133 S.E.2d ......