Newsome v. Harrell

• Decision Date: 17 November 1916
• Docket Number: 96.
• Parties: NEWSOME v. HARRELL.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

90 S.E. 855

146 Ga. 139

NEWSOME v. HARRELL.

No. 96.

Supreme Court of Georgia

November 17, 1916

Syllabus by the Court.

The wrongful conduct of a scrivener, who did not write a contract as instructed, will not relieve the party who directed its preparation, but who failed, through his own negligence, to read it before sending it to the other party, who in good faith accepted it and acted upon it.

(a) If one of two innocent persons must suffer, he who puts it in the power of a third person to inflict the injury must bear the loss.

"When the defendant in a civil case introduces no evidence, he is entitled to the opening and conclusion of the argument."

There was no merit in any other assignment of error.

Error from Superior Court, Glascock County; B. F. Walker, Judge.

Action by G. B. Newsome against S. F. Harrell. There was a judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error. Reversed.

J. C Newsome, of Gibson, for plaintiff in error.

GILBERT J. (after stating the facts as above).

1. If one signs a written contract without acquainting himself with its contents, he is estopped by his own negligence to ask relief from his obligation, if there is no fraud or artifice in procuring his signature. McCormack v. Molburg, 43 Iowa 561. It is not contended by defendant in error that there was any fraud or artifice in the procuring of his signature to the written contract. He merely insists that he directed his son, Willie, to write an instrument of a different character from that which was written and sent to the plaintiff without having been read by the sender. He does not contend that he was unacquainted with the English language, or that he could not read. In fact no excuse whatever is given; and under such circumstances he will be bound to a performance of his contract. He directed his son to act for him; and if the result of this was that one of two innocent persons must suffer, he who puts it in the power of the third person to inflict the injury must bear the loss. Park's Code, § 4537; Ellis v. United States Fertilizer, etc., Co., 64 Ga. 572(3); Blaisdell v Bohr, 77 Ga. 381. Harrell caused his son to execute the written instrument, and to deliver it to Newsome; and Newsome, having acted upon it, cannot be made to suffer on account of the negligence of Harrell in failing to read the instrument before sending it, or on account of the wrongful conduct of the scrivener in failing to write it as...