Baskerville v. Gaar, Scott & Co.
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from circuit court, Codington county. Hon. Julian Bennett, Judge Action by M. R. Baskerville against Gaar, Scott & Co. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion. The normal meaning of language in a written instrument can no more be changed by construction, than it can be contradicted directly, by an avowed inconsistent argument on the strength of the talk of the parties at the time the instrument was signed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from circuit court, Codington county. Hon. Julian Bennett, Judge Action by M. R. Baskerville against Gaar, Scott & Co. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion. The normal meaning of language in a written instrument can no more be changed by construction, than it can be contradicted directly, by an avowed inconsistent argument on the strength of the talk of the parties at the time the instrument was signed. Violette v. Rice, 53 N. E. 144; Black v. Batchelder, 120 Mass. 171; Flynn v. Bourneuf, 143 Mass. 277; Power Co. v. Ploward, 150…
1Opinion of the CourtFuiaer, P. J.
At the trial of this action to recover an agent’s commission on certain sales of threshing machinery there was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff, and the defendant appeals. The first cause of action stated in the complaint is based upon a written contract between the parties, by which respondent is authorized to sell appellant’s .threshing machines at list price in certain territory in this state on commission, and the second cause of action is to recover a commission of 10 per cent, pursuant to an oral agreement subsequently made, and by which respondent aided in procuring a purchaser for…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Stewart v. MatherWisconsin Supreme Court · 1873
- Lincoln v. McClatchieSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1869
- Scott v. Patterson & ParkerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1890
- Carter v. WebsterIllinois Supreme Court · 1875
- Levy v. CooganNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1890
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Ball v. DolanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1908
- Flinders v. HunterUtah Supreme Court · 1922
- Gaar, Scott & Co. v. BrundageSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
- Karsten v. RootSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1918