Dinch v. Workman

Citations

• 75 Pa. Super. 101
• 1920 Pa. Super. LEXIS 231

Syllabus

<p>Bonds — Surety—Parol—Contemporaneous agreement — Defense.</p> <p>In an action by an obligee in a bond against the surety, the defense was set up that the latter had been induced to sign the bond because a parol contemporaneous agreement had been entered into whereby the obligee had agreed to transfer a judgment against the principal debtor and that.such transfer had not been made. The plaintiff introduced evidence to the effect that during the negotiations the parties had arrived at an agreement upon the terms of the execution and delivery of the bond, and that the matter of the assignment of the judgment was an afterthought and not one of the considerations for the signing of the bond.</p> <p>Under such circumstances, it was reversible error for the court to charge that, if the promise was a mere gratuity, made after the conditions had been agreed upon, it would not defeat a recovery. Under the statute of frauds the defendant could not be bound to pay the debt of another until he had actually signed the bond, and any negotiations conducted prior to that time, were for the consideration of the jury in the way of a defense.</p> <p>Trial — Charge of court — Answers to points.</p> <p>Where a point, submitted, contains an abstract proposition of law upon an assumed fact, it is for the court to determine the legal truth of the conclusion from the assumed fact, and the point should be affirmed or refused without qualification.</p> <p>A point which does not limit the jury to the consideration of the evidence is bad in form, and should be flatly refused without qualification.</p>