Minnesota Sandstone Co. v. Clark

Citations

• 35 Wash. 466
• 77 P. 803
• 1904 Wash. LEXIS 471

Syllabus

<p>Evidence — Varying Writing by Parol — Contracts—Legality —Agreement as to Refund on Freight Shipped. Where the purchaser of stone agreed in writing to pay the freight, and alleges an oral agreement whereby the vendor guaranteed that the same should not exceed thirty cents per cwt., agreeing to pay any excess, or to turn over to the purchaser any amount that the railroad company might refund, oral evidence will not he held admissible to vary the terms of the written agreement, as in the case of an illegal contract, on account of the illegality of such refund, where the illegality of the contract was not pleaded, and the evidence touching such illegality was meager, and fails to show any intent to violate the law, except by indulging in forced construction or innuendo.</p> <p>Same — Contracts—Illegal Part Separable. If such an agreement were illegal, plaintiff could still recover on the balance of the contract, since the consideration is legal and the illegal provision is separable from the rest of the contract.</p> <p>Same — Construction op Contract — Oral Agreement Varying Terms of Writing. Where a written contract of sale provided that the purchaser will pay the freight charges “as agreed upon between you and I, the above price being f. o. b.,” parol evidence of an oral agreement that the seller would pay any freight charges in excess of a certain rate is inadmissible, as contradicting the writing.</p>