Himovitz

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment entered in favor of the plaintiffs for damages. .

The action was to recover for the breach of a written contract whereby defendant agreed to deliver to the plaintiffs a certain quantity of scrap iron. The contract as it was reduced to writing was expressed in the following terms:

In addition to a denial of the allegations of the complaint, defendant alleged that his signature to the contract was obtained through plaintiffs’ fraud in that defendant could not read or write the English language, and that it was not understood that any specific quantity of scrap iron should be delivered by the defendant to the plaintiffs, but only a lot of iron then in the possession of defendant, the quantity of which was not accurately ascertained. Defendant did deliver eighty-five tons of iron, and it was his claim that that included the whole of the quantity intended to be sold. [1] The contract, it will be observed, is specific- as to the number of tons sold, and it contains no ambiguous term which would make proper any oral testimony as to what the intent of the -parties was; hence the sole question presented turned upon the assertion on the part of the…