Goodwin v. Nickerson
California Supreme Court
Goodwin v. Nickerson, 51 Cal. 166 (Cal. 1875)
Goodwin v. Nickerson
Opinion of the Court
The twelve thousand dollar note sued on is clearly the note described and referred to in the contract between the parties, and the note is, therefore, to be read in connection with the contract, as though the note had been incorporated in the contract. In this view and upon any construction of the contract it was error in the court below to exclude the proof offered by the defendant that the plaintiff had broken one of the stipulations of the contract, in not having expended on the mine a sum greater than five hundred dollars.
Judgment and order denying a new trial reversed and cause remanded.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- J. O. GOODWIN v. J. R. NICKERSON
- Cited By
- 17 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Ebomissoey Note.—When, at the time of the execution of a promissory note, a contract in writing is made between the payor and payee upon a separate piece of paper which describes the note and clearly refers to it, the note is to be read in connection with the contract as though it had been incorporated into it, and, in an action on the note brought by the payee, the payor may introduce evidence that the payee has broken the stipulations of the contract.