First Chatham Bank v. Liberty Capital, LLC, 325 Ga. App. 821

Bank seeks specific performance and equitable reformation of a Letter Agreement over a loan purchase for Hampton Island development.
Letter Agreement referenced Lots T004, T005, T007 and TL10; Commitment Letter and closing documents referenced different lot numbers.
Closing and related documents identified LOTS 4, 5, 9 and 10; HUD statement listed 4, 5, 9, 10.
Bank demanded purchase of Acquisition Loan on second anniversary; Liberty Capital refused.
Trial court denied summary judgment; court found genuine issues of material fact regarding the lot numbers and terms.
Court of Appeals holds jurisdiction is proper and affirms denial of summary judgment to Bank on mutual-mistake theory.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether mutual mistake supports reformation and specific performance	Letter references Lot 7 as a typo; all parties knew the four Hampton Island lots were 4, 5, 9, 10.	Discrepancy in lot numbers defeats mutual mistake; evidence insufficient to prove a common drafting error.	Genuine issues of material fact remain; not entitled to summary judgment on mutual-mistake theory.
Whether this Court or Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review the equitable relief ruling	Equity relief issues fall under Supreme Court as equity cases.	Appeal on underlying contract issues falls within this Court's jurisdiction.	This Court has jurisdiction; equity relief is ancillary to underlying contract issues.

American Manufacturers Mut. Ins. Co. v. E A Technical Svcs., 270 Ga. App. 883 (Ga. App. 2004) (mutual mistake requires clear, unequivocal, decisive evidence)
Tidwell v. Bassett, 271 Ga. App. 867 (Ga. App. 2005) (contemporaneous documents and conduct may show true intent; heavy burden)
Hall v. Hall, 303 Ga. App. 434 (Ga. App. 2010) (underlying contract terms control; mutual mistake must be shown)
Durham v. Durham, 291 Ga. 231 (Ga. 2012) (equity cases and appellate jurisdiction considerations)