(Download) "W.T. Rawleigh Co. v. Washburn Et Al." by Supreme Court of Montana ~ Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: W.T. Rawleigh Co. v. Washburn Et Al.
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 25, 1927
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 66 KB
Description
Contracts ? Guaranty ? Extension of Time of Payment of Debt ? Sufficiency of Consideration ? Want of Consideration ? Burden of Proof ? Fraud ? When Defense not Available ? Failure to Read Contract ? Effect on Liability of Party. Contracts ? Failure to Read ? Party may not Escape Liability, When. 1. Persons of mature age and not laboring under any disability may not avoid the obligation of a written contract (of guaranty) by the assertion that they did not read it before affixing their signatures or that they did not appreciate the nature of the obligation imposed thereby. Same ? Function of Courts is to Interpret, not to Make New Contracts for Parties. 2. It is not the province of courts to make contracts for parties sui juris; they must interpret and enforce them as made by the parties themselves, in accordance with the terms thereof, when legitimate and based upon a valid consideration. Same ? Guaranty ? When Defense of Fraud not Available. 3. Where a distributor of merchandise was neither an agent nor employee of the company which furnished the goods to him and the company did not in anywise hold him out as its agent, the defense of fraud was not available to defendants in an action by the company on a contract under which defendants guaranteed payment of all moneys due from the distributor to the company. Same ? Want of Consideration ? Burden of Proof. 4. The burden of showing a want of consideration sufficient to support an instrument lies with the party seeking to avoid it. Same ? Promise Founded Partly on Past and Partly on Executory Consideration Enforceable. 5. A promise founded partly on a past consideration and partly on an executory one is enforceable. Same ? Guaranty ? Consideration ? Extension of Time of Payment of Debt ? Sufficiency. 6. Before plaintiff manufacturing company would enter into a renewal contract with a distributor of its goods, it required him to furnish a written contract of guaranty signed by responsible parties agreeing to pay the company on termination of the renewal contract the amount due it from the distributor at the time of the execution of the guaranty or what might become due thereafter; in consideration it promised to furnish - Page 309 the distributor with more goods. The guaranty was furnished, no further goods, however, being thereafter ordered. Held, in an action to recover on the guaranty, that there was a sufficient consideration to support the contract of guaranty of the distributors indebtedness existing at the time of the execution of the contract, to-wit, extension of time of payment, and that, in addition, the agreement as to payment of existing and future indebtedness, being indivisible, was based upon the further consideration that the company would sell more goods to the distributor, the fact that he thereafter did not order more goods not affecting its sufficiency.