Long v. Beach
Decision Date | 21 February 2000 |
Docket Number | No. A00A0650.,A00A0650. |
Citation | 529 S.E.2d 901,242 Ga. App. 448 |
Parties | LONG v. BEACH. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Byrne & Counts, Michael T. Byrne, Snellville, Gregg P. Counts, Decatur, for appellant.
William R. Ashe, Loganville, for appellee.
Long brought this action against her son, Beach, alleging that he refused to repay $70,000 that she had lent him as a down payment on a home. Finding that when the home was purchased, the parties executed a "gift letter" stating that Beach was under no obligation to repay the money, the trial court granted summary judgment in his favor. Long testified that the gift letter was signed to satisfy a requirement imposed by the mortgage company and that the oral understanding between her and Beach was that he would repay the money upon sale of the house, which has now occurred. She claims that Beach also admitted in an earlier proceeding that he owed her the money. Contending that there are material issues of fact, Long appeals the grant of summary judgment to Beach.
Consequently, any prior or contemporaneous oral agreement that the money was a loan rather than a gift would not be admissible to contradict the letter.
In the testimony given by Beach in the earlier proceeding, he merely pondered whether he should give the money to his mother in the interest of family harmony. That did not constitute an admission that he had agreed to repay the money. And even if it did, the parol evidence rule, cited above, would render the agreement unenforceable if it was entered into before or contemporaneous with execution of the written instrument. Any agreement to repay entered into afterward would not be enforceable in this case, as there has been no showing of any consideration in support thereof.
Judgment affirmed.
1.Ryder v. Schreeder, 224 Ga. 382, 385(2), 162 S.E.2d 375 (1968), disapproved on other grounds, Burnette Ford, Inc. v. Hayes,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lewis v. Ikner
...termite repairs does not constitute valuable consideration to support the note. Regarding the down payment money, in Long v. Beach , 242 Ga. App. 448, 529 S.E.2d 901 (2000), a mother transferred money to her son to use as a down payment on a house, and when the house was purchased the mothe......
-
Myers v. Myers
..., 413 B.R. 573, 579 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 2009) ; Lewis v. Ikner , 349 Ga.App. 21, 825 S.E.2d 443, 447 (2019) ; Long v. Beach , 242 Ga.App. 448, 529 S.E.2d 901, 902 (2000) ; and Nazy v. Leonardi , 2016 IL App (1st) 134044, ¶ 47, 2016 WL 2855394. Despite their insistence that these cases address......
- Widener v. State
-
IN RE TMS
... ... She testified that she took this action because "[i]t got to the point she wasn't coming [home for] long" periods of time so I felt like she didn't need my assistance anymore ... And I just didn't want to throw her out or anything like that.\" ... \xC2" ... ...