Guidery

Guidery v. Green

Good Law
1892 Cal. LEXIS 876·95 Cal. 630·30 P. 786
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 15, 1892No. 14474California1,066 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Harrison, J.

The plaintiff’s intestate, one Frost, brought this action to obtain certain specific relief for an alleged violation of a written agreement entered into between him and the defendant, January 12, 1885. The defendant set qp as one of his defenses to the action that the agreement set out in the complaint had been superseded and annulled by a subsequent written agreement, executed in March, 1885, by the plaintiff and one Threlfall on the one part, and the defendant on the other. *633 Upon the trial of the cause, the defendant, after having proved the execution of the subsequent written agreement, sought to show that it had been executed upon the consideration and agreement between the parties thereto that the agreement of January 12, 1885, should be canceled, and all claims of the plaintiff against the defendant thereunder waived. The plaintiff objected to this testimony, on the grounds that it was an attempt by parol evidence to vary and contradict the terms of a written instrument, and also that it was not responsive to any issues made by the pleading. The court having sustained this objection, the defendant then presented certain amendments to his answer, in order to obviate the…

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.