181 S.E. 264 | N.C. | 1935
Civil action to recover for alleged breach of "Credit Memorandum."
On 14 September, 1933, the plaintiff delivered to the defendant a wrecked Chevrolet car and took in exchange credit memorandum which was to be allowed as a credit or reduction "on the list price or prevailing price of $200.00 on a two-ton Dodge truck (short wheel base) or either $135.00 on a Plymouth four-door sedan. It being optional with the holder of this Credit Memorandum which car or truck he or she wishes to buy."
Thereafter, the plaintiff transferred said credit memorandum to his brother, W. C. Dawson, who presented it as a cash item in an exchange *419 of automobiles with the defendant. The defendant declined to honor the memorandum, contending that it was only to be used in the purchase of a new car or truck; and that such was the understanding of the parties at the time of its issuance. Objection; overruled; exception.
This action is to recover damages for defendant's failure or refusal to honor the credit memorandum under the circumstances of its tender.
From a verdict for defendant, the plaintiff appeals, assigning errors. The appeal presents the single question whether reversible error was committed in allowing the defendant to state in his oral testimony, over objection, that it was a part of the understanding between the parties the credit memorandum was to be used and allowed only in the purchase of a new car or truck.
That parol evidence is inadmissible to vary or contradict the terms of a written instrument is so well established in the law of evidence as to be well nigh axiomatic. Carlton v. Oil Co.,
In Evans v. Freeman,
On the trial, the latter rule was thought to be applicable to the facts of the instant case. With this we agree. It is not discernible in what particular the testimony of defendant runs counter to the terms of the written instrument. Indeed, some of its language lends color to the defendant's understanding. The matter was properly submitted to the jury. The verdict and judgment will be upheld.
No error.