Llop v. National Bank of Georgia

• Decision Date: 02 May 1980
• Docket Number: No. 59329,59329
• Citation: Llop v. National Bank of Georgia, 268 S.E.2d 777, 154 Ga.App. 504 (Ga. App. 1980)
• Parties: LLOP v. NATIONAL BANK OF GEORGIA.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Page 777

268 S.E.2d 777

154 Ga.App. 504

LLOP v. NATIONAL BANK OF GEORGIA.

No. 59329.

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Submitted Feb. 4, 1980.

Decided May 2, 1980.

Morton P. Levine, Atlanta, for appellant.

Donald J. Goodman, Atlanta, for appellee.

SMITH, Judge.

The National Bank of Georgia (NBG) brought suit on a promissory note against appellant Llop. At the close of the evidence, the trial court granted a directed verdict in favor of NBG. Appellant cites as error the court's exclusion of testimony proffered to establish a parol agreement between the parties subsequent to the subject transaction. We affirm.

"Parol evidence shall be admissible . . . to prove a new and distinct subsequent agreement (or) to enlarge the time . . . of performance." Code § 38-507. "It, of course, goes without saying that an alleged subsequent agreement, like any other contract, is not binding if it is not supported by a legal consideration, but litigants sometimes get tripped up on this." Green, Ga. Law of Evidence, 491, § 216. Tatum v. Morgan, 108 Ga. 336(2), 33 S.E. 940 (1899); J. E. M. Enterprises, Inc. v. Taco Pronto, Inc., 145 Ga.App. 573, 574, 244 S.E.2d 253 (1978).

Appellant made an offer of proof, attempting to show a subsequent parol agreement with NBG to the effect that he was no longer obligated to pay interest on the subject note and further that he did not have to pay the principal until the conclusion of certain federal litigation to which he was a party. As consideration therefor appellant recited his satisfaction of a separate, past-due obligation and certain token payments made on the subject note. This, however, was not enough, for "(a)n agreement on the part of one to do what he is already legally bound to do is not a sufficient consideration for the promise of another." Johnson v. Hinson, 188 Ga. 639(2), 4 S.E.2d 561 (1939). Since NBG's promise to forego further...