Fullerton v. Storthz

Kirby, J.,

(after stating the facts). Appellant insists that the court erred in permitting the introduction of parol testimony to contradict, vary or add to the terms of the written contract. Appellee insists, however, that he did not intend for his assignment or indorsement of the note to have any effect other than to evidence the fact of its payment, and asked a reformation thereof to express the true intention of the parties existing at the time it was made.

'The written contract between the Bradley Company and Storthz expressly provides, after the agreement for extending the time for the…