Court Opinion

ID: 9583547
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 22:39:40.699855+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:39:04.028290
License: Public Domain

Beasley, Judge,
concurring specially.
I concur fully because we are bound by the law as expressed by the Supreme Court 'of Georgia. However, if transactions of this type, which are an 'everyday occurrence, were required to be documented by the simple instruments which are missing here, statements and acts of the players would not have to be recalled years later, perhaps faultily, and strangers to the transaction would not have to decide what was intended' or what was effected. Compare the situation regarding the $13,000 (written subordination agreement and hence no dispute) with the contrary situation regarding the additional loans (conflicting evidence and hence a costly and delay-ridden dispute). The expedient device of requiring a written subordination would foreclose litigation, a goal the law itself should be written to achieve.
I am authorized to state that Presiding Judge Deen joins in this special concurrence.