Skip to main content
· 3/17/2006

Cox v. U. S. Markets, Inc.

Citations

  • 628 S.E.2d 701
  • 278 Ga. App. 287
  • 2006 Fulton County D. Rep. 988
  • 2006 Ga. App. LEXIS 311

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • noting that guaranty “specifically incorporated the terms of the promissory note and amortization schedule”
  • “One cannot expand the scope of review or supply additional issues through a process of switching, shifting, and mending your hold.” (citation and punctuation omitted)
  • irrelevant matter contained within affidavits in support of or in opposition to motions for summary judgment should be excluded
  • Statute of Frauds satisfied “if the guaranty ‘either in itself or in connection with other writings, identifies
  • The Statute of Frauds is satisfied where a signed guaranty refers to other writings, which can be identified completely by this reference without the aid of parol evidence, and where the group of writings, construed together, contain “all the terms of the bargain.’’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Barnes, Johnson, Ruffin

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.