Adams v. Hicks

Citations

• 41 Tex. 239

Syllabus

<p>1. Ambiguity—Evidence— A., being post trader at a post of the United States army, entered into a written contract with H., by tito terms of which H. was to furnish all the means necessary to purchase-. merchandise for the supply of the post, to conduct the business, and receive all the profits; in consideration of which he was to pay to Á. the sum of three hundred dollars per month. A. was afterwards removed from the position of post trader and n. appointed. The following clause occurred in the contract: ‘‘It is further agreed that, in the event of the removal of Fort Griffin to some other point, and provided the party of the first part (A.) retains the appointment, of post trader, then the party of the second part (H.) is to conduct the business as heretofore stipulated. This article is to remain in force for the period of one year, beginning June, (1st,) 1872:” Held, that there was no latent ambiguity in said clause of the contract; and parol evidence was not admissible to prove an agreement between the parties that the contract should continue in force one year in any event, and notwithstanding the removal of A.</p> <p>2. In suit upon a written contract, the plaintiff will not be allowed to introduce evidence to show a state of.faets at variance with the contract, on the ground of ambiguity in its terms, unless the defendant has been advised of the same by appropriate averments in the petition.</p>