Court Opinion

ID: 9581528
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 22:15:47.403677+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:37:02.155183
License: Public Domain

Currie, J.
(on motion for rehearing). We fear that our original opinion herein is subject to the interpretation that an opposite result might have been reached by this court if the action had been one at law for damages instead of in equity for specific performance. We are now satisfied that our determination would have been the same even though the action had not been one of a class formerly cognizable in a court of chancery.
Evidence of the surrounding circumstances would have been equally admissible in an action at law as it would in one in equity for the purpose of seeking to ascertain the intention *33bof the parties with respect to the clause relating to future negotiations of the time for change of possession. For a discussion of the admissibility of evidence of surrounding circumstances in interpreting contracts, see Georgiades v. Glickman, ante, p. 257, 75 N. W. (2d) 573.
By the Court. — Motion for rehearing is denied with $25 costs.