Legal Opinion

F. D. Cummer & Son Co. v. Findley

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided May 11, 1939No. 9165PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

GIBSON, District Judge.

The defendant has moved for a new trial. The suit was to recover the purchase price of a road-building machine for which defendant, through his agent, had given a written purchase order. The principal defense pleaded was that the parties had a contemporaneous oral agreement that the purchase was to be effective only if defendant secured a certain road-making job, which job had not been procured. Upon trial the oral testimony was excluded.

The written order was absolute. The oral agreement in effect' destroyed the written contract. Under such circumstance, the exclusion…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Findley v. F. D. Cummer & Son Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1940

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API