Schwass v. Hershey

Citations

• 125 Ill. 653
• 18 N.E. 272

Syllabus

<p>1. Fraud or mistake—in written contract—relief in chancery—parol evidence. While the rule in courts of law is, that the written instrument is better evidence of the intention of the parties than can be furnished by parol proof, and that the writing, therefore, in contemplation of law, contains the true agreement of the parties, courts of equity will, if justice requires it, look beyond the writing, and grant relief from the effect of a contract entered into or founded in mistake or induced by fraud.</p> <p>2. In such case, resort may be had to parol evidence to establish the true contract, which, when found by the court, may he enforced by appropriate decree.</p> <p>3. Where a purchase and sale are of property other than that described in the agreement and actually conveyed, and the purchaser is induced, by fraud, to part with his money for property different from his purchase, a. court of equity has the power, on bill filed, to declare the true agreement, and grant relief, either by reforming the deed or by compelling specific performance of the real contract.</p> <p>4. Where it is sought to establish a contract, by parol, different from that evidenced by an agreement in writing, entered into between the parties, the proof should be clear and satisfactory. In such case, the presumption is in favor of the written contract, and its terms must control, unless it is. clearly and satisfactorily established, not only that the written instrument incorrectly states the agreement, but the contract sought to be substituted must be definitely and clearly shown.</p>