Outcault Advertising Co. v. Smalley

Citations

• 101 Kan. 645
• 168 P. 677
• 1917 Kan. LEXIS 168

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Written Contract — Defense — Fraudulent Representations — Parol Evidence Admissible. Where fraudulent representations are pleaded as a defense in an action on a contract in writing, parol testimony is admissible to show the fraudulent representations.</p> <p>2. Same — Demurrer. The demurrer to the plaintiff’s evidence was properly overruled.</p> <p>8. Same — Instructions. Thebe was no error committed in refusing the instructions requested.</p> <p>4. Same — Fraud of Agent in Procuring — Good Defense. The fraud of an agent in procuring a contract, while acting within the scope of his employment, is a good defense in an action by the principal to enforce the contract.</p> <p>5. Same — Special Findings — Consistency. The answers to the special questions were not inconsistent with each other, nor with the general verdict.</p> <p>6. Same — Verdict—Evidence. The verdict and judgment were supported by evidence.</p>