Durand v. Heney

Citations

• 33 Wash. 38
• 73 P. 775
• 1903 Wash. LEXIS 486

Syllabus

<p>Contracts—Latent Ambiguity—Construction—When Question for Jury. Where a contract with an Alaska transportation company gave plaintiff the exclusive hauling of all its freight to A, specifying price and conditions, and required plaintiff to have on hand a large equipment therefor (which part plaintiff performed) and contained the further clause that in case of the falling off of freight to A the plaintiff should have the “preference over others in hauling freight to B or other points;” and it appears that at the time of the execution of the contract the Canadian government' was agitating the exclusion of aliens at A which would, and shortly did, result in the falling off of freight to A, the clause for preference right in hauling to B is not void for uncertainty or indefiniteness, hut is within the rule that the construction of a written contract is for the jury and not the court where a latent ambiguity is produced by extrinsic facts, showing the intent of the parties, or requiring construction by persons experienced in the calling engaged in.</p>