Evans v. Oregon & Washington Railroad

Citations

• 58 Wash. 429
• 108 P. 1095
• 1910 Wash. LEXIS 951

Syllabus

<p>Contracts—Oral Rescission—Consideration. Where a subcontractor refused to perform and was about to abandon a written contract, the contract may be orally rescinded, and the principal contractor’s oral agreement to pay an additional sum is not without consideration or nudum pactum, but an election to make a new contract rather than recover damages.</p> <p>Trial—Verdict—Special Damages—Inconsistency—Contracts— Consideration. In an action by a subcontractor to recover additional compensation promised him after undertaking the work, a special finding by the jury that the consideration for the promise was the fact that the principal contractors were under bond to complete the work within a stated time does not control a general verdict for the plaintiff, where the jury were instructed that they must find some consideration for the promise and that one promise is a good consideration for another; since (1) the consideration for the promise was a legal question for the court, (2) the special finding implies that the minds of the parties met and that mutual promises were made, and (3) the consideration found was sufficient.</p> <p>Appeal—Review—Pasties Entitled. Railroad contractors, upon appeal from a judgment against them in favor of a subcontractor, cannot urge error in the granting of a nonsuit as to the railroad company, joined with them as defendants in the action.</p> <p>Appeal—Review—Verdict. A verdict upon conflicting evidence will not be set aside when supported by sufficient direct and circumstantial evidence.</p> <p>Appeal—Preservation of Grounds—Estoppel. Where appellants requested an instruction that a preponderance of the evidence was sufficient, they cannot complain of the failure of the court to instruct that it requires clear, positive, and satisfactory evidence to establish a rescission of a written contract.</p>