Pan-American Life Insurance v. Carter

Pan-American Life Insurance Co. v. Carter

Pan-Am. Life Ins. v. Carter, 195 S.E. 326 (Ga. Ct. App. 1938)

Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia · State Appellate Courts
Decided: February 10, 1938
Docket: No. 26500
Judges: Broyles
Citations: 195 S.E. 32657 Ga. App. 2941938 Ga. App. LEXIS 571

Opinion of the Court — Broyles

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Broyles, C. J.

1. “When a party makes an offer of a certain sum to settle a claim, the amount of which is in bona fide dispute, with the condition that the sum offered, if taken at all, must be received in full satisfaction of the claim, and the party receives the money, he takes it subject to the condition attached to it, and it will operate as an accord and satisfaction.” Riley v. London Guaranty & Accident Co., 27 Ga. App. 686 (109 S’. E. 676), and cit. The same ruling applies where the claimant, instead of receiving money as a settlement of his claim, receives a check or draft from the other party in full settlement of the claim. And this is so even though the claimant makes no effort to, and does not, cash the check or draft, and subsequently tenders it back to the other party. This is true because the check or draft was necessarily accepted as cash by the claimant in full satisfaction of his claim. Interstate Life & Accident Co. v. Wilson, 52 Ga. App. 171 ( 183 S. E. 672 ); Howard v. Ga. Home Ins. Co., 102 Ga. 137 ( 29 S. E. 143 ).

2. Where, without the practice of any fraud upon her, a plaintiff accepts, in full satisfaction of her claim, a lesser amount than what she claims is due her, there is an accord and satisfaction, and she is not entitled to a recovery. Interstate Life &c. Co. v. Wilson, supra, note 2 .

3. Applying the foregoing rulings to the facts of the instant case, a finding in favor of the defendant’s plea of accord and satisfaction was demanded. The verdict for the plaintiff was contrary to law and the evidence, and the refusal to grant a new trial was error.

Judgment reversed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 13 cases

View all citing references →

Relies on it most ⓘ

Studstill v. American Oil Co.191 S.E.2d 538 (Ga. Ct. App. 1972)
Holton Dodge, Inc. v. Baird163 S.E.2d 346 (Ga. Ct. App. 1968)
Kennedy v. Bateman123 S.E.2d 656 (Ga. 1961)
Gay v. American Oil Company153 S.E.2d 612 (Ga. Ct. App. 1967)
Mullinax v. Shaw239 S.E.2d 547 (Ga. Ct. App. 1977)
National Life & Accident Insurance v. Parker19 S.E.2d 409 (Ga. Ct. App. 1942)

Most recent

Mullinax v. Shaw239 S.E.2d 547 (Ga. Ct. App. 1977)
Warner Robins Supply Co. v. Malone238 S.E.2d 709 (Ga. Ct. App. 1977)
American Security Van Lines, Inc. v. Amoco Oil Co.210 S.E.2d 832 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974)
Sentry Insurance v. Mells208 S.E.2d 566 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974)
Henry v. Allstate Insurance199 S.E.2d 338 (Ga. Ct. App. 1973)
Studstill v. American Oil Co.191 S.E.2d 538 (Ga. Ct. App. 1972)

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
	Interstate Life & Accident Co. v. Wilson, 183 S.E. 672 (Ga. Ct. App. 1935)	12
	Howard v. Ga. Home Ins., 29 S.E. 143 (Ga. 1897)	17
	Riley & Co. v. London Guar. & Accident Co., 109 S.E. 676 (Ga. Ct. App. 1921)	50

`/`	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