Wright v. Monongahela Natural Gas Co.

Citations

• 2 Pa. Super. 219
• 1896 Pa. Super. LEXIS 42

Syllabus

<p>Contract — Ambiguity—Construction by parties — Question for jury.</p> <p>The parties to a contract, where there may be some ambiguity, always have a right and can put their own construction upon their own lease, and it is a proper question to submit to the jury whether both parties agree to such a mutual construction, and the jury so finding should adopt such construction as its own.</p> <p>Evidence — Parol evidence to define position of parties.</p> <p>It is the dictate of common sense, and therefore a rule of law, that every written instrument is to be interpreted according to'the subject-matter, and the distinction is' too often lost sight of between evidence to alter the language of a written instrument, which is inadmissible, and evidence to define the position of the parties and the nature and condition of the subject contracted, about which evidence is admissible.</p> <p>Oral evidence will be received which does not contradict the writing, but only makes clear by the acts of the parties how they interpret it. A lessee defended against a lease on the ground that it was so unintelligible and so ambiguous as to be void. Held, That evidence was properly admissible of the acts of the party as tending to show a mutual construction acquiesced in by both parties.</p> <p>Contracts — Construction—Reasonable time.</p> <p>When parties agree that a thing shall be done and no time is specified in which it is to be completed, the law presumes that a reasonable time will be given considering the nature of the business.</p>