Morris v. Bradley
North Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from District Court, Barnes County, J. A. Coffey, J. From a judgment in plaintiff’s favor, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appeals. An executory oral agreement cannot change, modify, or vary the terms of a written contract. Bev. Codes 1905, § 5328; Mettel v. Dales, 12 S. D. 632, 82 N. W. 181; 11 Am. & Eng. Enc.
Read the full summary
Appeal from District Court, Barnes County, J. A. Coffey, J. From a judgment in plaintiff’s favor, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appeals. An executory oral agreement cannot change, modify, or vary the terms of a written contract. Bev. Codes 1905, § 5328; Mettel v. Dales, 12 S. D. 632, 82 N. W. 181; 11 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law, 582; Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cranch, 87, 3 L. ed. 162. Evidence of plaintiff, as to value- of the property, incompetent and too remote. Minneapolis Threshing Mach. Co. v. McDonald, 10 N. D. 408, 87 N. W. 993; First Nat. Bank v. Coffin, 162 Mass.…
1Opinion of the CourtFisK, J.
This case was before this court on a former appeal. See Morris v. Bradley, 20 N. D. 646, 128 N. W. 118. The nature of the litigation and the essential facts are there fully disclosed, and it is unnecessary to restate them here. On the first trial a verdict was directed for the defendant, and on such former appeal we reversed this ruling and ordered a new trial, holding the proof amply sufficient, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, to entitle plaintiff to recover. The last trial resulted in a verdict and judgment in plaintiff’s favor, and from such judgment, and from the order denying…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Morris v. BradleyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910