Mendes v. Freiters
Nevada Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, Eureka County. The facts are stated in the opinion. I. Admitting that the account as stated was for a greater sum than was actually due, parol evidence was admissible to show that the settlement was not made as a final settlement, and was not so considered by the parties at the time it was made, but was approximately correct, and was to be corrected when the true balance was determined. II.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, Eureka County. The facts are stated in the opinion. I. Admitting that the account as stated was for a greater sum than was actually due, parol evidence was admissible to show that the settlement was not made as a final settlement, and was not so considered by the parties at the time it was made, but was approximately correct, and was to be corrected when the true balance was determined. II. Such an agreement is valid. There is neither actual nor constructive fraud in the transaction. By the terms of the contract, and under said…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Leonaed, C. J.:
This appeal is from a judgment in favor of the intervenors above named, whereby it was ordered and adjudged that, the lien of plaintiff’s attachment upon certain personal property be postponed to the liens of the intervenor’s attachment, and that the sheriff should sell said property, and out of the proceeds of such sale pay, first, the judgments of the intervenors against defendant in the order in which they were issued; and, second, out of the surplus, if any, satisfy plaintiff’s judgment in whole or part. Plaintiff’s attachment was prior in time, and his…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Moresi v. SwiftNevada Supreme Court · 1880
- Ayres v. HustedSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1843
- Tully v. HarloeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Patrick v. MontaderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
- Dana v. McClureSupreme Court of Vermont · 1867
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- May v. GesellschaftIllinois Supreme Court · 1904
- Anderson v. Bank of Lassen CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Suksdorff v. BighamOregon Supreme Court · 1886
- Wilson v. BarbourMontana Supreme Court · 1898
- Remington v. FraguliusWashington Supreme Court · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.