Griffin v. Bass Foundry & Machine Co.

135 Ala. 490
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedNovember 15, 1902
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 135 Ala. 490 (Griffin v. Bass Foundry & Machine Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Griffin v. Bass Foundry & Machine Co., 135 Ala. 490 (Ala. 1902).

Opinion

TYSON, J.

This is an action for damages for an alleged breach of a contract.

The complaint avers that the defendant agreed to pay for the cutting of wood and the royalty on the same, and that the breach consisted in its failure to do so. The negotiations between the parties resulting in a final agreement between them is shown by several writings. A number of letters and the original draft of the contract embody the terms and stipulations finally agreed upon. These several writings must, therefore, .be looked to for the purpose of ascertaining what yvere the terms of the contract.

It is true that defendant agreed to advance to the plaintiff money to pay for the cutting of wood and the royalty on same. But its promise to advance the money to pay the royalty, if not for the cutting of the wood, was upon condition that a timber deed be made to it covering the right of possession and right of way. The obligation of defendant to pay being conditional and not absolute, the condition and its performance should have been averred in the complaint.—Griel v. Solomon, 82 Ala. 85. This not being done, there is clearly a variance between the contract counted upon and the one proven. Besides, the condition having been shown and no performance of it proven, no breach of the contract as alleged is shown.

The 'affirmative charge, if requested, could well have been given for the defendant. This being true, whatever of errors may have been committed in the giving or refusing of charges is without injury.—The Bienville Water Co. v. City of Mobile, 125 Ala. 178.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Knights of Modern Macabees v. Gillespie
71 So. 67 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1915)
Landrum & Co. v. Wright
66 So. 892 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1914)
Postal Telegraph-C. Co. v. Nail
66 So. 903 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1914)
Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Louissell
66 So. 839 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1914)
Newberry v. Atkinson
64 So. 46 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1913)
Latham v. Boyles
50 So. 1001 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1909)
Torry v. Krauss
43 So. 184 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
135 Ala. 490, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/griffin-v-bass-foundry-machine-co-ala-1902.