Cargill Coal Co. v. Valentine
| Decision Date | 07 May 1957 |
| Parties | CARGILL COAL CO., a Wis. corporation, Respondent, v. Clair I. VALENTINE, Appellant. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
Johns, Roraff, Pappas & Flaherty, La Crosse, for appellant.
Hale, Skemp, Hanson & Schnurrer, Joseph D. Becker, La Crosse, for respondent.
The defendant contends that the written phrase in the contract 'to be financed,' clearly indicates an intention that the plaintiff would accept the purchase price in the form of deferred payments, and that since the times for payment are not fixed, the contract is indefinite as to payment, and hence is invalid under the rule of Buck v. Pond, 1905, 126 Wis. 382, 105 N.W. 909; Poole v. Tannis, 1908, 137 Wis 363, 118 N.W. 188, 118 N.W. 864, and Bast v. Sproll, 1922, 176 Wis. 371, 187 N.W. 223. It is the position of the plaintiff that the contract calls for cash payment from the defendant upon the completion of the installation of the furnace.
It was the view of the Small Claims Court, as expressed in its decision, and which was sustained by the Circuit Court, that
We are of the opinion that considered as a whole, the language of the contract is reasonably or fairly susceptible of different constructions, and that it is therefore ambiguous. Where there is ambiguity in a contract, the sense in which the words therein are used is a question of fact. Woodall v. Democrat Printing Co., 1947, 250 Wis. 348, 27 N.W.2d 437. It is the rule that in determining the meaning of a writing which is ambiguous, it is proper to receive evidence to ascertain the situation and surrounding circumstances in order that the court may put itself in the place of the parties and then ascertain their intention. Jones v. Holland Furnace Co., 1925, 188 Wis. 394, 206 N.W. 57.
If the language of an instrument is ambiguous, the court is not restricted to a consideration of the face of the instrument in ascertaining the intent of the parties. Ludtke v. Compound School District, 1944, 246 Wis. 235, 16 N.W.2d 562.
When the sufficiency of a complaint is challenged by demurrer, every reasonable...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Craigs, Inc. v. General Elec. Capital Corp.
...of the contested term." Wards Co. v. Stamford Ridgeway Assocs., 761 F.2d 117, 120 (2d Cir.1985); accord Cargill Coal Co. v. Valentine, 275 Wis. 598, 82 N.W.2d 883, 886 (1957). Accordingly, on remand, GECC must be afforded the opportunity to present extrinsic evidence concerning the meaning ......
-
Peninsular Carpets, Inc. v. Bradley Homes, Inc., 290
... ... Cargill Coal Co. v. Valentine (1957), 275 Wis. 598, 82 N.W.2d 883.' ... While Lemke ... ...
-
Patti v. Western Mach. Co.
...Judgment affirmed. 1 Lepper v. Wisconsin Sugar Co. (1910), 146 Wis. 494, 501, 128 N.W. 54, 131 N.W. 985.2 Cargill Coal Co. v. Valentine (1957), 275 Wis. 598, 602, 82 N.W.2d 883.3 Sipple v. Zimmerman 1968), 39 Wis.2d 481, 496, 159 N.W.2d 706, and cases cited therein.4 For applications of sim......
-
Francke v. City of West Bend
...that test, any fact is established upon which plaintiff can recover, a demurrer thereto should be overruled. Cargill Coal Co. v. Valentine, 275 Wis. 598, 82 N.W.2d 883; City of Milwaukee v. Hurless, 7 Wis.2d 608, 97 N.W.2d Upon remand of the record if the notice does not comply with the sta......