First Nat. Bank of Lincoln v. Penn Mut. Life Ins.

Eighth Circuit

First Nat. Bank of Lincoln v. Penn Mut. Life Ins.

147 F. 519, 77 C.C.A. 215, 1906 U.S. App. LEXIS 4272

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedAugust 27, 1906

DocketNo. 2,314

StatusPublished

This text of 147 F. 519 (First Nat. Bank of Lincoln v. Penn Mut. Life Ins.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

First Nat. Bank of Lincoln v. Penn Mut. Life Ins., 147 F. 519, 77 C.C.A. 215, 1906 U.S. App. LEXIS 4272 (8th Cir. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

HOOK, Circuit judge,

after stating the case as above, delivered the opinion of the court.

There was a written contract in clear, unambiguous and comprehensive terms, showing upon its face that it was designed to evidence a settlement of all matters in dispute between the parties' who executed it. It specified in full detail the things each was to-do and what moneys were to be paid. The plaintiffs desired to-show by oral evidence that there was a contemporaneous unwritten contract imposing upon one of the parties an obligation to pay an additional sum of money as part of the settlement. The action of the trial court in rejecting the evidence was manifestly correct. The relations of the parties, the subject-matter and language of the contract and the circumstances surrounding its execution show that the parties intended it to be a complete memorial of their mutual agreements.

The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

HOOK, Circuit judge,

after stating the case as above, delivered the opinion of the court.

There was a written contract in clear, unambiguous and comprehensive terms, showing upon its face that it was designed to evidence a settlement of all matters in dispute between the parties' who executed it. It specified in full detail the things each was to-do and what moneys were to be paid. The plaintiffs desired to-show by oral evidence that there was a contemporaneous unwritten contract imposing upon one of the parties an obligation to pay an additional sum of money as part of the settlement. The action of the trial court in rejecting the evidence was manifestly correct. The relations of the parties, the subject-matter and language of the contract and the circumstances surrounding its execution show that the parties intended it to be a complete memorial of their mutual agreements.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

147 F. 519, 77 C.C.A. 215, 1906 U.S. App. LEXIS 4272, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/first-nat-bank-of-lincoln-v-penn-mut-life-ins-ca8-1906.