Hudson v. Riley

Citations

• 104 Kan. 534
• 180 P. 198
• 1919 Kan. LEXIS 309

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Promissory Note — Written Agreement Relating to Same Matter■— Two Instruments Construed Together. Where two or more writings are executed at the same time, by the same parties, relating to the same subject matter, and one of such writings refers to the other, and it is deposited with a third party, to await the happening of certain contingencies, both should be treated and interpreted as a single contract.</p> <p>2. Same — Interpretation of Writings for Court — Option to Buy Capital Stock — Consideration for Note. The interpretation of the writings is a question of law for the court, and it is held herein that the transaction between the parties, as evidenced by the writings, gave the defendants an option to buy certain capital stock, and was not an outright sale of it, and that unless such stock was purchased as specified in the agreement, there was no consideration for the note deposited with the escrow agreement and the shares of stock offered for sale. -</p> <p>3. Same — Unambiguous Written Contract — Parol Evidence to Vary its Terms Inadmissible. Where parties, after negotiations, commit their agreements to an unambiguous writing, it is to be presumed that every stipulation and material matter have been included in the writing, and parol evidence of preceding conversations or negotiations in conflict with the written contract are not admissible in evidence.</p> <p>4. New Trial — Court Dissatisfied with Verdict — Duty of Court. Upon a motion for a new trial, the duty devolves on the trial judge to exercise his own judgment as to the credibility of witnesses and the probative force of their testimony, and when he is of the opinion that the verdict is not warranted by the testimony, it is his duty to set it aside and grant a new trial.</p>