Plano Mfg. Co. v. Kautenberger
| Decision Date | 12 October 1903 |
| Parties | PLANO MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Appellant, v. NICK KAUTENBERGER |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Appeal from Keokuk District Court.--HON. JOHN T. SCOTT Judge.
ACTION at law to recover an amount due on an alleged settlement. Directed verdict for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
Reversed.
Brown & Willcockson for appellant.
Stockman & Hamilton for appellee.
Originally the action was to recover a balance due on open account. After defendant had answered, pleading an accord and satisfaction, the plaintiff amended its petition, claiming a balance due on settlement amounting to $ 93, with interest. To this defendant filed a general denial, and also alleged that the $ 93 claimed by plaintiff represented certain machines which had been shipped to defendant that were burned, and which amount was credited to defendant on the settlement, the balance having been paid in cash at the time of the alleged settlement. On these issues the case was tried, resulting in a directed verdict for defendant. It appears that an agent and adjuster representing plaintiff made a settlement on or about October 10, 1898, and at that time a settlement sheet was drawn up, subject to plaintiff's approval, which was signed by defendant and said agent, which showed on the credit side an item "Machines burned, $ 93.00." This credit sheet has been certified for our inspection, but it is in such form that it cannot accurately be reproduced in an opinion. It is sufficient to say that this item, as it appears on the credit sheet, is as consistent with the idea that it really represents a debit, although appearing on the credit side, as that it represents an absolute credit. Had the item appeared in red ink, every bookkeeper would doubtless have said that it represented a debit, although appearing on the credit side, and that it was entered on that side for the purpose of balancing the account. From the fact that it appears in black ink, it may well be said that the credit sheet itself is ambiguous, and subject to explanation. At any rate, it does not so conclusively appear from the sheet itself that this item is a credit as to justify the trial court in directing a verdict for the defendant.
In addition to this sheet, plaintiff offered evidence to show that there was no agreement that defendant should have credit for the machines which had been burned, but, on the contrary,...
To continue reading
Request your trial