Erickson v. Poole

• Citation: 126 Wash. 130,217 P. 715
• Decision Date: 22 August 1923
• Docket Number: 17742.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Washington
• Parties: ERICKSON et ux. v. POOLE.

217 P. 715

126 Wash. 130

ERICKSON et ux. v. POOLE.

No. 17742.

Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.

August 22, 1923

Appeal from Superior Court, Yakima County; V. O. Nichoson, Judge.

Action by Charles E. Erickson and wife against Nina L. Poole. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Holcomb and Pemberton, JJ., dissenting.

Grady Shumate & Velikanje, of Yakima, for appellant.

McAulay & Meiggs and Thos. H. Wilson, all of Yakima, for respondents.

BRIDGES J.

The controversy here is about some interest payments growing out of a contract for the sale of real estate. Nichols and wife were the owners of the real estate, and they and the appellant entered into a written contract for the purchase of the property by the latter, upon certain terms and conditions. The last of the payments which appellant was to make to Nichols and wife were as follows: January 1, 1923 $2,000; January 1, 1924, $2,500; January 1, 1925, $2,200; and January 1, 1930, $7,000--aggregating $13,700. All of these payments were to draw interest at the rate of 7 per cent. per annum. The appellant had made some of the earlier payments on this contract when she entered into a written agreement with the respondents whereby she contracted to sell the lands in question to them, and also to assign to them her interest in the Nichols' contract. In this latter contract appellant was designated as the first party and the respondents the second parties. After certain preliminary clauses the contract provides as follows:

'The purchase price of said land and premises is $35,000.00, of which the sum of $4,000 has this day been paid, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged by first party and the remainder to be paid as follows, to wit: $6,000 on October 1, 1920, $1,400 on January 2, 1921, $4,200 on October 1, 1921; $1,500 on January 2, 1922; $4,200 on October 1, 1922. Interest on all deferred payments at the rate of 7 per cent. per annum, payable on the dates of the foregoing installments. Upon the completion of said deferred payments, together with all interest as above set forth, party of the first part shall assign, transfer and set over unto the second parties her said contract with the said Mary Dean Nichols and O. R. Nichols, and second parties upon such payments agree and assume to pay the balance due the said Fitts (mistakenly used for Nichols) upon said contract. It is further agreed that upon such payments this does assign, sell, transfer and set over to the second parties said contract. First party hereby agrees and guarantees that said balance due the said Mary Dean Nichols and O. R. Nichols upon said contract shall be not to exceed $13,700, after January 1, 1922.'

It will thus be observed that the total of the payments to be made directly to the appellant is $21,300, and that when that sum shall have been paid the respondents should then assume the balance of the payments due on the Nichols' contract, which payments amount to $13,700, thus making the total consideration of $35,000.

The appellant insists that respondents must pay 7 per cent. interest on this $13,700 from the date of the contract, which is July 16, 1920, to October 1, 1922, when they were to take over the payments provided for in the Nichols' contract. On the other hand, the respondents contend that the appellant must pay this disputed interest.

A careful consideration of the contract convinces us that it places upon the appellant the duty to pay the interest in controversy.

The clause which we have quoted obligates the respondents to pay various installments down to October 1, 1922, which payments were to aggregate $21,300, and 'interest on all deferred payments at the rate of 7 per cent. per annum, payable on the dates of the foregoing installments.' Appellant contends that the 'deferred payments' mentioned mean all the deferred payments on the $35,000, which was the total purchase price. We do not so read the contract. It expressly provides that the respondents shall pay 7 per cent interest on the deferred payments according to the ...