Murdock v. Ganahl

• Decision Date: 31 October 1870
• Parties: JOHN F. MURDOCK et al., Respondents, v. C. GANAHL et al., Appellants.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

47 Mo. 135

JOHN F. MURDOCK et al., Respondents,

v.C. GANAHL et al., Appellants.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

October Term, 1870.

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court.

L. D. Picot and T. T. Gantt, for respondents.

Woerner & Kehr, for appellants.

CURRIER, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

This case shows that the plaintiffs, August 31, 1868, by a written lease, demised to the defendants certain premises for the term of two and a half years, the term commencing on the first day of September, 1868. It further appears, from a written memorandum, signed by the parties and indorsed on the lease, that the defendants, in consideration of certain alterations and repairs agreed to be made by the lessors, “agreed to pay, for and during the term granted by the lease, the additional rent of $15 per month,” thereby making the monthly aggregate of rent $115. On the 7th of December, the same year, the parties entered into a still further written stipulation, by which the defendants, for a valuable consideration, “disclaimed all cause of complaint respecting the manner and time of making said alterations, and (again) agreed to abide by all the agreements on the lessees' part contained in said lease and (first additional) agreement.” This suit was brought January 4, 1869, to recover the rent for the previous month of December, the plaintiffs therein claiming $115. The defendants deny their liability for more than $100.

At the trial the defendants offered parol evidence in relation to facts and circumstances attending the original negotiation for the lease, and showing that the contemplated improvements were not completed till the last of November or first of December; that the defendants were injured by the delay, and also showing what was said and done respecting the rent for the months of October and November. This evidence was admitted over the plaintiffs' objections. The trial was by the court, and a judgment was rendered for the plaintiffs, but for a less sum than appeared to be due upon the face of the contracts. On appeal to General Term the judgment was reversed, and judgment was there entered for the plaintiffs for the $115 and accrued interest. The defendants bring the case here by appeal.

The admission of the parol evidence is sought to be defended upon the ground that it aided the construction of the written stipulations. It was shown by the defendants that the improvements provided for in the first written addition to the lease were completed on or before the first of December,...