Sutter v. Moore Investment Co.

Citations

• 30 Wash. 333
• 70 P. 746
• 1902 Wash. LEXIS 690

Syllabus

<p>NOVATION-SUBSTITUTION OP DEBTORS-EVIDENCE-CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTED DEBTOR.</p> <p>Conversations between a debtor and one wbo assumed Ms obligation under a new contract are admissible, in an action by the creditor against the substituted debtor, for the purpose of showing the understanding arrived at by the parties to the novation.</p> <p>SAME —■ SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE.</p> <p>In an action upon a contract by novation wherein a new debtor was substituted for the old, a nonsuit was properly refused where it appeared that plaintiff refused to supply a restaurant keeper with meats for his business owing to non-payment of bills due; that defendant agreed to pay the debtor’s obligation to plaintiff and the latter agreed to accept the defendant instead of the original debtor; that as part of the agreement the receipts of the restaurant business were turned over to defendant; and that further goods were furnished on the credit of defendant under the new agreement and bills rendered to defendant, who made part payment on both the old and the new accounts.</p> <p>SAME-CONTRACT MADE BY CORPORATE EMPLOYEE-LIABILITY OF CORPORATION.</p> <p>Evidence that the manager of the defendant company, at the time the alleged novation was entered into, called plaintiff up by telephone and said: “This is the Moore Investment Company, Mr. Moore talking,” was sufficient to establish that the contract was entered into by the manager in his representative capacity rather than as an individual.</p>