Hetherington Letter Co. v. O. F. Paulson Construction Co.

Supplemental Opinion

RAWLINGS, Justice.

Due to oversight in processing procedures the following was inadvertently omitted from the opinion filed October 14, 1969, 171 N.W.2d 264, which is hereby supplemented.

Another question posed, especially upon defendant’s cross-appeal, is whether Mr. Randall’s testimony relative to flood-proofing the basement was admissible under any concept other than fraud.

The underlying problem is whether the contract between Hetherington Letter Company and Paulson Construction Company required the latter to floodproof the basement.

In an effort to buttress Hetherington’s…