Farley v. Letterman

Citations

• 87 Wash. 641
• 152 P. 515
• 1915 Wash. LEXIS 957

Syllabus

<p>Accord and Satisfaction—Necessity of Dispute. In an action for rent under a lease calling for one-third of the crop as rent, a letter written by the landlord before execution of the lease stating that the tenant may pay $1,000 as cash rent in lieu of the share, is not admissible as an accord and satisfaction, since at the time it was written there was no contract, no breach of contract, no controversy and nothing in dispute.</p> <p>Evidence—Parol Evidence—To Vary Writing—Informal Writings. The rule excluding parol evidence to vary the terms of a written contract applies to an informal letter written by the lessor, tending to contradict the terms of a formal written lease, executed before a notary public.</p> <p>Evidence—Parol Evidence—To Vary Writing. Where a written lease was executed January 22, 1912, calling for one-third of the crop as rent, a letter by the lessor written in December, 1911, stating that the tenant may pay $1,000 as cash rent in lieu of the share, will be deemed merged in the complete instrument and is inadmissible to vary the terms of the lease, especially where there was nothing to show that the offer was accepted or that there was any meeting of the minds with regard thereto.</p> <p>Evidence—Parol Evidence'—To Vary Writing—Admissibility—■ Appeal—Prejudice. A written contract of lease, completely embodying the transaction, free from ambiguity, not attacked for fraud, calling for one-third of the crop as rent, cannot be varied by oral evidence of an agreement to accept cash rent in lieu of the share; and the admission of such evidence is manifestly prejudicial where the verdict upon such issue covers all of the causes of action and counterclaims in one general award.</p>