B. Gortz Manufacturing Co. v. Parks

It is clear, from the evidence, that the parties to the written agreement upon which this action was brought intended that that instrument should relate to the prior contract made by the plaintiff with Teichman & Potter, and that the insertion of the word “Company” in the agreement was due to clerical error or mistake. On this point nothing *1119need be added to the opinion of the court at the trial. The judgment must therefore be affirmed, with costs. All concur.