Court Opinion

ID: 9627927
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 08:59:36.779042+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:06:52.808001
License: Public Domain

*581SCHAUER., J.
I dissent. I am in accord generally with the propositions of law declared by Mr. Justice Edmonds and by Mr. Justice Carter in their respective dissenting opinions and I agree that the majority opinion is unsound in law and in public policy as pointed out by Justices Edmonds and Carter. I am further of the view that the majority opinion is untenable on any fair and realistic appraisal of the evidence and the findings of fact.
The evidence overwhelmingly and without substantial dispute establishes that there was ample consideration for the contract, that no creditor was injured by it, and that the corporation defendant, which the majority opinion supports in invoking its own weakly asserted intent to defraud as a basis for excusing its failure to perform the contract, was in fact at all times solvent.
The major issue of fact in the case was on the point as to whether the contract was in fact delivered as an actual contract or was merely signed for possible future use dependent upon a condition precedent which had not then, and which defendant asserts never has, occurred. Upon this all-important question the trial court failed to make any finding.
For each and all of the reasons indicated the judgment should be reversed.