Honesdale Glass Co. v. Storms

Citations

• 125 Pa. 268
• 17 A. 347
• 1889 Pa. LEXIS 713

Syllabus

<p>1. Where the execution of an instrument has been obtained by means of a fraud, or where there is an attempt to make a fraudulent use of it, in violation of an agreement made at the time of its execution and without which it would not have been executed, parol evidence is admissible to prove the agreement, though contradicting the terms of the instrument.</p> <p>2. Evidence to be admissible, in this class of eases, must be clear, precise and indubitable; — not in the sense that there must be no opposing testimony, but in the sense that the evidence must carry a clear conviction of its truth and be sufficient in weight to move the conscience of a chancellor to reform the instrument.</p>