International Text-Book Co. v. Anderson

• Citation: 162 S.W. 641,179 Mo. App. 631
• Parties: INTERNATIONAL TEXT-BOOK CO. v. ANDERSON.
• Decision Date: 31 December 1913
• Court: Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)

162 S.W. 641

179 Mo. App. 631

INTERNATIONAL TEXT-BOOK CO. v. ANDERSON.

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

December 31, 1913.

1. APPEAL AND ERROR (§ 934) — PRESUMPTIONS TO SUPPORT JUDGMENT.

Where, in a case tried by the court without a jury, no instructions were given or requested, the judgment should be affirmed if supported by the evidence in any view, as all presumptions and intendments were in aid of it.

2. CONTRACTS (§ 93)—VALIDITY OF ASSENT— MISTAKE—NEGLIGENCE.

That a party who signed a contract to pay $56 in installments for a course of instruction did not know that it required him to pay such sum was no defense to an action for that amount, in the absence of fraud, accident, or mistake, though he was a foreigner and unable to read the English language in which the contract was written, since a person competent to contract is conclusively presumed to know the contents of the contract he signs, which presumption is not rebutted by the fact that he did not read it, and, where he is unable to read it, it is his duty to have some one read it to him before signing it.

3. CONTRACTS (§ 95)—VALIDITY OF ASSENT— FRAUD OR DURESS.

That a person who executed a contract for a course of instruction was told by his foreman in the factory where he worked that it was a good thing was no defense to an action for the stipulated price of the instruction, where it did not appear that the foreman represented plaintiff, or that the contract was secured as a result of duress imposed on the part of the foreman.

4. DAMAGES (§ 125)—MEASURE—BREACH OF CONTRACT.

Where a contract for a course of instruction, to be paid for in installments, provided that the whole amount unpaid should be recoverable from defendant in event of his default in his payments, and plaintiff performed and repeatedly offered to perform all the conditions imposed by the contract on it, it could recover the full price after all the installments were past due, though defendant had not received the full course of instruction, due to his own abandonment thereof.

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Daniel D. Fisher, Judge.

Action by the International Text-Book Company against Adolph Anderson. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions.

Hall & Dame, of St. Louis (David C. Harrington, of Scranton, Pa., of counsel), for appellant. F. A. C. MacMannus, of St. Louis, for respondent.

NORTONI, J.

This is a suit for the balance due on a written contract for a course of instruction. The finding and judgment were for defendant, and plaintiff prosecutes the appeal. The balance due on the contract is only $46, and the case originated before a justice of the peace, but found its way by appeal to the circuit court.

It appears plaintiff is an incorporated company with its home office in the state of Pennsylvania, and engaged in the business of instruction by means of correspondence through the mails. Defendant is a native of Sweden residing in St. Louis, and at the time he entered into the contract with plaintiff was engaged as a shoe worker in one of the factories here. While at his work in the shoe factory, he was approached by plaintiff's agent, who solicited him to contract for a course of instruction. At that time defendant was 22 years of age, and had resided in this country about nine months. It appears he was endeavoring to learn the English language and could write his name and some other words therein. His foreman, Loftis, told him the proposed course of instruction was a good thing and to sign the contract for it. Defendant signed the written contract whereby he bound himself to pay $56 in installments of $5 per month for the course in the several English branches therein named. At the same time he paid plaintiff's agent the first installment of $5, and a month thereafter paid him a second installment in the same amount. The contract was signed by defendant on March 16th, and received by plaintiff at its home office a few days thereafter. Immediately and in due time, plaintiff transmitted to defendant, through the mail, some books for study and instructions how to proceed. Defendant went about the studies, but it seems he did not care to pursue that in arithmetic, and therefore, on April 30th, or six weeks after signing the contract, wrote plaintiff as follows: "April 30, 1906. Gentlemen: I do not care to keep up my arithmetic any longer. What I want to learn most of all is reading, writing and spelling. It is very hard for me to write when I do not know the language. I will still continue to pay my monthly payments promptly, so kindly send my books on grammar. Yours truly, Adolph Anderson, St. Louis, Mo." Defendant says this letter was written for him by a friend at his instance and request, and that he personally signed and mailed it to plaintiff. Answering this letter, plaintiff wrote defendant urging him to continue the course as marked out in the contract, but it seems defendant became dissatisfied and dropped it entirely. He refused to pay further installments on the contract and discontinued the studies, though plaintiff urged him to continue them, and offered to perform all of the conditions of the contract on its part. As before said, the contract provides for the payment of a total sum of $56 in monthly installments of $5 per month, and plaintiff paid two of such installments. The contract provides furthermore that: "In case default be made in the payment of any one of said installments, or any part thereof, when due and payable, I hereby agree that the whole amount remaining unpaid shall thereupon, at your option, become due and payable." After the time stipulated for all of the payments had elapsed and defendant's refusal to pay, this suit was instituted by plaintiff for the balance due on the contract, that is, $46.

A jury was waived and the case tried before the court. No instructions were given or refused, and none were requested, and, of course, if the evidence supports the judgment of the court in any view, such judgment should be affirmed, for all presumptions and intendments are in aid of it. But if it appears from the admissions of defendant that he contracted and owes the debt, and that it is unpaid, of course, the judgment may not be sustained. Though the...