Hollman

Hollman v. Hollman

Good Law
1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 282·88 Cal. App. 748·264 P. 289
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 31, 1928Docket No. 6057.California1,810 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Burroughs, J.

-This is an action upon a promissory note. Plaintiff recovered a judgment in the sum of $8,500 with also an attorney fee of $500. From said judgment the defendant appeals.

It is appellant’s contention that he was entitled to a credit on said promissory note of $5,350 which the court failed to give him. This claim depends upon the construction of a certain contract entered into by the parties hereto under the following circumstances:

Plaintiff and defendant were husband and wife. July 14, 1921, they entered into an agreement for the purpose of settling and determining their property rights. So far as material to this decision said agreement recites:

The trial court held that the contract was ambiguous and permitted plaintiff to introduce oral evidence for the purpose of ascertaining the true intent and meaning of the language of the contract. This, appellant contends, constituted error in that he claims the contract is clear and certain in its terms and subject to but one construction, that the monthly payments therein provided were to be applied to a reduction of the amount due on the promissory note. Counsel for respondent contends that the only interpretation that can be…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.