Shughart v. Moore

• Decision Date: 24 May 1875
• Citation: Shughart v. Moore, 78 Pa. 469 (Pa. 1875)
• Parties: Shughart <I>versus</I> Moore.
• Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Page 469

78 Pa. 469

Shughart versus Moore.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

May 12, 1875.

May 24, 1875.

May 12th 1875.

Before AGNEW, C. J., SHARSWOOD, MERCUR, GORDON, PAXSON and WOODWARD, JJ.

Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland county: Of May Term 1874, No. 79.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

J. G. Vale and W. J. Shearer, for plaintiff in error.—The evidence rejected was not to vary the terms of the lease, but to show that the promise which was the inducement to execute the lease was not kept: Partridge v. Clarke, 4 Barr 166; Powelton Coal Co. v. McShain, 25 P. F. Smith 238; Christ v. Diffenbach, 1 S. & R. 465; Campbell v. McClenachan, 6 Id. 172; Oliver v. Oliver, 4 Rawle 145; Gamp's Appeal, 15 P. F. Smith 476.

J. Hays and W. H. Miller, for defendants in error.—Unless an omission from a writing has been by fraud or mistake, it cannot be added by parol: Martin v. Berens, 17 P. F. Smith 459.

Mr. Justice SHARSWOOD delivered the opinion of the court, May 24th 1875.

The cases of Weaver v. Wood, 9 Barr 220 and Powelton Coal Co. v. McShain, 25 P. F. Smith 238, are full to the point that the offer of evidence complained of in the first assignment of error ought to have been received. These cases settle beyond all question that where a promise is made by one party in consideration of the execution of a written instrument by the other, it may be shown by parol evidence. It is no answer to this, to say that the jury may have found for the defendant on the evidence upon the ground that the plaintiff had prevented the defendant from fulfilling his contract to build the barn. How can we say that this was the point upon which the evidence was rendered when both points were distinctly submitted, and when a very material part of the plaintiff's...