Sims v. Greenfield & N. R. Co.
Decision Date | 12 May 1903 |
Citation | 74 S.W. 421,102 Mo. App. 29 |
Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Parties | SIMS v. GREENFIELD & N. R. CO. et al. |
1. Plaintiff agreed to pay $100 to the defendant railroad company in consideration that it would extend its line to his town, and have it in running order on a certain date. The road was built and in running order before said date. Afterwards another railroad bought the defendant company outright, and later the purchasing road became a competitor of a third railroad company for certain business. Afterwards the third railroad company absorbed the purchasing road by a long-time lease, and competition ceased, and no more trains were run over the line of the defendant company. Held, that plaintiff could not recover his $100.
2. So long as a written contract stands unassailed for fraud or mistake, it is conclusive on both parties, and parol evidence is inadmissible to vary, contradict, add to, or subtract from its terms.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Stone County; Geo. W. Thornberry, Judge.
Action by Arch L. Sims against the Greenfield & Northern Railroad Company and others. Judgment for defendants. Plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Edward J. White, for appellant. Carr McNatt, for respondents.
The suit grew out of what plaintiff alleges to be a violation of the following contract:
The evidence is that citizens of the city of Aurora, including plaintiff, subscribed $30,000 to the Greenfield & Northern Railroad Company as an inducement for that company to extend its road to the city of Aurora, and that plaintiff, and most, if not all, of the other subscribers, paid the amount by each subscribed, and the road was built into Aurora within the time...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Matthews v. Phoenix Ins. Company
... ... Draemel, ... 16 Daly 104, 9 N.Y.S. 497; Carstairs v. Ins. Co., 18 ... F. 473; Ins. Co. v. Fidelity Title & T. Co., 123 Pa ... 516; Sims v. Ins. Co., 101 Wis. 586; Railroad v ... Ins. Co., 53 Neb. 514. (2) The instrument introduced in ... evidence is in the nature of an agreement or ... ...
-
Jarrett v. Prosser
... ... inadmissible to affect it." ( Van Sant v ... Runyon, 19 Ky. Law Rep. 1981, 44 S.W. 949; Sims v ... Greenfield & N. R. Co., 102 Mo.App. 29, 74 S.W. 421; ... Cotton States Bldg. Co. v. Rawlins (Tex. Civ. App.), ... 62 S.W. 805; Coman v ... ...