Hagen Co. v. Greenwood

Citations

• 27 Pa. Super. 239
• 1905 Pa. Super. LEXIS 44

Syllabus

<p>Contract — Parol evidence — Explanation of subject-matter.</p> <p>Where a written agreement for the sale of a laundry dryer contains the words, “Terms: Dryer, net sixty days,” and the parties differ as to their meaning, parol evidence is admissible to explain them. In such a case the parol evidence does not vary or contradict the -written instrument.</p> <p>Contract — Sale—Machine.</p> <p>In an action to recover the price of a machine where the evidence shows that the machine, known and understood by a previous inspection of one of like character, was purchased upon trial and developed in that trial such structural defects as could not be remedied, and that the machine was thereby rendered worthless for the purposes for which it was sold and bought, the case is for the jury and a verdict and judgment for plaintiff should be sustained.</p> <p>Practice, C. P. — Affidavit of defense — Trial.</p> <p>No use can be made of an affidavit of defense at the' trial, unless the affidavit has been offered in evidence.</p>