Codd v. Langley

Citations

• 75 Wash. 45
• 134 P. 467
• 1913 Wash. LEXIS 1949

Syllabus

<p>Reformation of Instruments — Right to. Written instruments may be reformed to express tbe actual oral agreement and intention of tbe parties.</p> <p>Same — Evidence—Sufficiency. Mistake, as ground for tbe reformation of written instruments, must be established by tbe clear preponderance of tbe evidence.</p> <p>Same — Defenses—Acquiescence. Where tbe right to reformation was claimed as soon as enforcement of tbe contracts was sought, and there was no injury by tbe delay, there was no acquiescence.</p>