Eighme v. Holcomb

Citations

• 84 Wash. 145
• 146 P. 391
• 1915 Wash. LEXIS 773

Syllabus

<p>Sales — Contracts—Construction. Whete a contract partly written on a printed form, for the sale of apples on consignment, provided in the printed part that the consignor agreed to pool his apples with other growers and sell for the pool price and that the factor “shall not sell any fruit for less than the minimum prices as hereinafter stated,” leaving blank columns at the end of the printed form for the number of boxes, variety and minimum prices, which columns were not filled out, but the words were stricken and the space used for writing in an agreement whereby the consignee agreed to sell specified varieties for the pool prices of the factor, “with an advance on the following varieties,” of certain specified sums, the written part fixing the agreement for advances cannot be construed as the “minimum price” mentioned in the printed form, since the latter words were evidently permitted to remain in the form by inadvertence and no minimum price was agreed to; the words “advance” and “minimum price” not being synonymous in any sense; and there being no provision of the contract expressly showing an intention to base the minimum price on the advances specified, there was no ambiguity in the contract.</p> <p>Evidence — Parol Evidence — To Vary Writing. Parol evidence of experts to explain the terms of a contract is inadmissible when the contract is not ambiguous.</p> <p>Contracts ■ — ■ Construction — Ambiguity. In a contract partly written on a printed form, more attention is paid to the written than to the printed part.</p>