Parol evidence shall be admissible to show that a matter apparently covered by a judgment was not really passed upon by the court.
§ 9-12-43.Parol evidence admissible
Chapter 12. Verdict and Judgment · Article 2. Effect of Judgments · Last amended 1933 · Last verified July 17, 2026
In one sentenceO.C.G.A. § 9-12-43 allows parol — that is, outside — evidence to show that a matter which appears on the face of a judgment to have been decided was not in fact passed upon by the court.
Full Text of § 9-12-43
Plain-English Summary
A judgment’s written record does not always tell the full story of what a court decided. This section lets a party introduce evidence beyond the judgment itself — testimony, other documents, the record of the proceeding — to show that some issue the judgment appears to cover was never considered.
The word “parol” here means evidence outside the four corners of the written judgment, not solely spoken testimony. When a later dispute turns on whether a particular matter was litigated and decided in an earlier case, a court is not confined to reading the judgment’s bare text. It can look behind the judgment to what the earlier court examined and ruled on.
This section works hand in hand with the broader preclusion rules in this article. Those rules bind parties to what a judgment decided, or could have decided. This section supplies the tool for figuring out, when the judgment’s language leaves room for doubt, what fell inside that scope and what fell outside it.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does “parol evidence” mean in this section?
Evidence from outside the written judgment itself — such as testimony or other parts of the case record — used to clarify what the earlier court decided.
Why would a party need to introduce evidence about what a judgment covered?
Because a judgment’s written text can appear to resolve a matter that the court never examined, and a party may need to show that gap when the earlier judgment’s scope is disputed in a later case.
Does this section let a party contradict the plain terms of a judgment?
It permits evidence showing that a matter apparently covered was not in fact decided — narrowing what the judgment decided rather than rewriting its terms.
How does this section relate to the rule that a judgment binds the parties on matters put in issue?
It supplies a way to test that rule’s application, since a party can use outside evidence to show a particular matter never was, and could not have been, decided.
Who typically raises this kind of evidence?
A party facing a claim that an earlier judgment already resolved a matter, who wants to show that the earlier court in fact never reached that specific issue.
Amendment History
Orig. Code 1863, § 2839; Code 1868, § 2847; Code 1873, § 2898; Code 1882, § 2898; Civil Code 1895, § 3743; Civil Code 1910, § 4337; Code 1933, § 3-608.
Source & verification. Section text and amendment history are
reproduced verbatim from the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, published by the
Official Code of Georgia Annotated, Georgia Code Revision Commission / LexisNexis. Last verified July 17, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: georgia parol evidence judgment statuteevidence outside judgment georgiawhat a judgment decided vs what it appears to decide georgiacollateral attack scope of judgment georgia