Olson v. Northwestern Furniture Co.

• Decision Date: 02 January 1959
• Citation: 6 Wis.2d 178,94 N.W.2d 179
• Parties: Roy H. OLSON, Appellant-Respondent, v. NORTHWESTERN FURNITURE CO., a corp., Respondent-Appellant.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Page 179

94 N.W.2d 179

6 Wis.2d 178

Roy H. OLSON, Appellant-Respondent, v. NORTHWESTERN FURNITURE CO., a corp., Respondent-Appellant.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Jan. 2, 1959.

Patrick H. Fass, Mary J. Bate, Milwaukee, for appellant.

Zillmer & Redford, William C. Dill, Milwaukee, for respondent.

FAIRCHILD, Justice.

A claimant's acceptance and retention of a payment which he knows is tendered by an alleged debtor in full settlement of a disputed obligation constitutes an accord and satisfaction. Thomas v. Columbia Phonograph Co., 1911, 144 Wis. 470, 129 N.W. 522. In that case a plaintiff had accepted and retained a check. An accompanying letter and statement had identified the account and stated that the payment was in full. Plaintiff wrote a letter showing that he so understood. In Holbeck v. Southside Malleable Casting Co., 1936, 220 Wis. 399, 264 N.W. 384 the giving and acceptance of a note in compromise and settlement of a disputed claim constituted accord and satisfaction. In Lange v. Darling & Co., 1940, 233 Wis. 520, 290 N.W. 188, 191 there was a dispute as to whether an obligation to pay a bonus was dependent upon fulfillment of a condition. Plaintiff accepted and retained a check which was accompanied by a letter stating that it was 'the balance due on your 1934 bonus.' It was held that this was an accord and satisfaction.

In the case before us the affidavits do not disclose any oral or written statements expressing the fact that the checks in question were tendered upon the condition that they be accepted in full settlement, except the notations on the checks themselves. It appears to be the general rule, however, that a notation 'in full' upon the check sufficientlyshows that the payment was tendered upon the condition that it be accepted in full satisfaction. 1 Am.Jur., Accord and Satisfaction, page 225, sec. 24. See cases cited in Annotation, 34 A.L.R. 1035, 1036, and Annotation, 75 A.L.R. 905.

The check given May 3rd met all the requirements. Plaintiff had ceased to be employed by defendant. It sufficiently appears that the amount of any obligation of defendant to plaintiff was in dispute. Plaintiff conceded that he knew the check was marked 'in full' when he accepted and cashed it.

Plaintiff relies upon Johann v. Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp., 1953, 264 Wis. 447, 59 N.W.2d 637, 640. There recovery was sought upon an alleged contract for royalties on an invention assigned by plaintiff to defendant. Defendant claimed an accord and satisfaction where a payment had been made and plaintiff had accepted it in a written instrument as 'In full settlement for special services * * * and work.' It was there held that it was a jury issue whether the settlement was intended to cover all claims for royalties.

A similar issue might have been presented here if the May 3rd check had contained the same notation as the March 6th check, 'Salary in full.' It appeared that plaintiff had claimed compensation which included weekly payments referred to by the parties at times as salary, reimbursement of expenses, and a commission on sales. There appears to have been no dispute about the weekly payments but there was a dispute both about the reimbursement of...