Interior Linseed Co. v. Becker-Moore Paint Co.
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Rhodes E. Gave, Judge. (1) Whilst a written instrument is the consummation of all previous negotiations, and. its meaning, if clear, cannot he subverted or varied by extrinsic evidence, yet if the meaning of the written contract is obscure or ambiguous, it is always competent to receive parol or other testimony in order to explain the obscure or ambiguous language, *by showing the situation of the parties, the surrounding…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Rhodes E. Gave, Judge. (1) Whilst a written instrument is the consummation of all previous negotiations, and. its meaning, if clear, cannot he subverted or varied by extrinsic evidence, yet if the meaning of the written contract is obscure or ambiguous, it is always competent to receive parol or other testimony in order to explain the obscure or ambiguous language, *by showing the situation of the parties, the surrounding circumstances and the relation which the words of the writing bear to the facts constituting the subject of the…
1Opinion of the CourtFaris, J.
Plaintiff sued defendant for damages for an alleged breach of a written contract for the sale of linseed oil. On the trial nisi, before the court without a jury, plaintiff had judgment for $1523.42, and defendant duly appealed to the St. Louis Court of Appeals. Upon a hearing in the latter - court the judgment of the circuit court was affirmed in an opinion by Nortoni, J., in which Eeynolds, P. J., concurred. To the affirmance of the case Allen, J., was constrained to dissent, and to set forth his reasons therefor in an exhaustive opinion (Interior Linseed Co. v. Becker-Moore Paint Co., 190…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Ellis v. HarrisonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- Swett v. ShumwayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Keller v. WebbMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- Williams v. Chicago, Santa Fe & California Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1900
- Succession of RobertsonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1897
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Fisher v. MiceliSupreme Court of Missouri · 1956
- John E. FERGUSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. the FLYING TIGER LINE, INC., Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Friedman Textile Co. v. Northland Shopping Center, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1959
- Thompson v. Baltimore & OR Co.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1945
- Great Eastern Oil Co. v. DeMert & Dougherty, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1942
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.