Surles v. Miliken

Decision Date15 November 1895
Citation97 Ga. 485,25 S.E. 322
PartiesSURLES et al. v. MILIKEN.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Timber Lease—Construction.

A printed timber lease, made August 4, 1890, in which it was covenanted that the lessee might "commence boxing, working, or otherwise using the said timber for turpentine purposes" at any time he might desire, and also that the lessee should "have the right to continue to box, work, or otherwise use the said timber, and every portion thereof, for the full term of two years, beginning, with reference to each portion of the timber, from the time only that the boxing and working of each portion is commenced, it being the intention of the parties that this lease shall continue to operate until all of the timber, and each and every portion thereof, has been boxed, worked, and otherwise used for turpentine purposes for the full period of two (2) years, and shall end after the year 1893, " it appearing that the words "and shall end after the year 1893" were interlined before the lessor would consent to execute the lease, properly construed, gave the lessee no right at all to work or use the timber in question for any purpose after the expiration of the year 1893.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from superior court, Wayne county; J. L. Sweat, Judge.

Action by Ben Miliken against J. B. Surles and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error. Affirmed.

S. R. Harris and Goodyear, Kay & Brantley, for plaintiffs in error.

J. H. Thomas and John W. Bennett, for defendant in error.

LUMPKIN, J. This case turned entirely upon the construction to be given a timber lease made August 4, 1890, the material portions of which are quoted in the headnote. It appears that the main portions of the Instrument were in print, and that, before the lessor would agree to sign It, he required an Interlineation in ink of the words "and shall end after the year 1893." It is a well-set-tied rule in construing contracts, such, for instance, as policies of insurance, the main portions of which are printed, and the special or particular portions, adapting it to the precise agreement of the parties, are written, that the written words should be given greater force and effect than those which are printed. That rule is applicable, in principle, to the present case. The lessee contracted for the use of the timber, and every portion thereof, for the full term of two years. He was left free to begin boxing and working each portion of the leased premises whenever he chose,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • First Nat. Bank of Ardmore v. Gillam
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • November 8, 1927
    ...are in writing and other parts of it are printed, the parts in writing are to be given the greater weight. In the case of Surles v. Milikin, 97 Ga. 485 (25 S.E. 322), it was said: 'It is a well-settled rule, in construing contracts, such, for instance, as policies of insurance, the main por......
  • First Nat. Bank v. Gillam
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • November 8, 1927
    ...are in writing and other parts of it are printed, the parts in writing are to be given the greater weight. In the case of Surles v. Milikin, 97 Ga. 485, 25 S.E. 322, it said: 'It is a well-settled rule, in construing contracts, such, for instance, as policies of insurance, the main portions......
  • State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Staton
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • October 19, 2009
    ...conflict with the written portion, i.e., the name appearing on the declarations, the written portion must prevail. See Surles v. Miliken, 97 Ga. 485, 25 S.E. 322 (1895) ("It is a well settled rule, in construing contracts, such, for instance, as policies of insurance, the main portions of w......
  • Hodsdon v. Whitworth
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • March 10, 1980
    ...ink" are entitled to more consideration than the printed words. Shackelford v. Fitzgerald, 151 Ga. 35, 36, 105 S.E. 597; Surles v. Milikin, 97 Ga. 485, 486, 25 S.E. 322. The printed language containing the power of sale could have been in this instance completely obliterated so as to not le......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT