McMullan v. Nichols

McMULLAN Et Al. v. NICHOLS

McMullan v. Nichols, 292 S.E.2d 568 (Ga. Ct. App. 1982)

Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia · State Appellate Courts
Decided: June 22, 1982
Docket: No. 63805
Judges: Sognier, Deen, Pope
Citations: 292 S.E.2d 568162 Ga. App. 8651982 Ga. App. LEXIS 2368

Cited by 5 1 descriptions by later courts

Opinion — Sognier

Sognier, Judge.

Charles W. Nichols sued Billy and Rhonda McMullan seeking recovery for personal injuries arising out of an automobile accident. The McMullans pleaded accord and satisfaction on the basis of a release executed by Nichols and a draft endorsed by appellee. The release stated that it included “all claims... on account of all personal injury . . . property damage . . . already sustained or that I may hereafter sustain . . .” The draft recited “In payment of any and all claims arising from accident of 2/17/81.” The McMullans moved for summary judgment attaching the release and draft. Nichols countered with an affidavit stating that he had not read the release because he did not have his glasses with him and that he had relied upon the adjuster who told him the release and the amount covered only his property damage. The trial court denied appellants’ motion for summary judgment. Upon proper application by appellants, we granted this interlocutory appeal.

“This case is controlled by Conklin v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., 240 Ga. 58 ( 239 SE2d 381 ) (1977) and Riker v. McKneely, 153 Ga. App. 773 ( 266 SE2d 553 ) (1980). The record does not disclose any artifice, fraud or trick which prevented appellant from reading the release. No fiduciary relationship existed between the claims adjustor and appellant.”

Wyatt v. Jones, 159 Ga. App. 93, 94 ( 283 SE2d 48 ) (1981). The release is valid and summary judgment should have been granted in favor of appellants.

Judgment reversed.

Deen, P. J., and Pope, J., concur.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

(holding that plaintiff was bound by terms of general release he executed in favor of defendants despite allegation that he did not read release because he did not have his glasses with him and despite claim that scope of the release had been misrepresented)

Hall v. Burger King Corp., 912 F. Supp. 1509 (S.D. Fla. 1995)

Cited by 5 cases

View all citing references →

Relies on it most ⓘ

Hall v. Burger King Corp.912 F. Supp. 1509 (S.D. Fla. 1995)
Morris v. Chandler Exterminators, Inc.409 S.E.2d 677 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991)
Lokas v. Greer313 S.E.2d 725 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984)
Fincher v. Dempsey433 S.E.2d 78 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993)
England v. Airport Trailer Service, Inc.319 S.E.2d 498 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984)

Most recent

Hall v. Burger King Corp.912 F. Supp. 1509 (S.D. Fla. 1995)
Fincher v. Dempsey433 S.E.2d 78 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993)
Morris v. Chandler Exterminators, Inc.409 S.E.2d 677 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991)
England v. Airport Trailer Service, Inc.319 S.E.2d 498 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984)
Lokas v. Greer313 S.E.2d 725 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Conklin v. Liberty Mut. Ins., 239 S.E.2d 381 (Ga. 1977)	23
	Riker v. McKneely, 266 S.E.2d 553 (Ga. Ct. App. 1980)	10
	Wyatt v. Jones, 283 S.E.2d 48 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)	2

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list