Darling & Co. v. Frank Carter Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtNelson, J.
From the decision of the trial court on the motions after verdict, it appears that the court concluded that there was nothing in the original writing which obligated the defendant to indorse farmers’ notes; that the written contract was not ambiguous in that respect; that, because the contract provided that “verbal promises or agreements of any kind are unauthorized and will not be recognized by Darling & Company,” it must be conclusively presumed to contain the entire agreement between the parties; that parol evidence was improperly admitted to contradict the terms of the written contract,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Klueter v. Joseph Schlitz Brewing Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
- Hammond v. Capital City Mutual Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1912
- Boden v. MaherWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
- Burton v. DouglassWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. WernerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ball v. Stokely Foods, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1950
- Milwaukee County v. Badger Chair & Furniture Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
- Bahr v. Evangelical Lutheran St. John's Society of PoynetteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
- Rahr Malting Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1944
- Washington Homes Asso. v. WanecekWisconsin Supreme Court · 1948