Opinion
(Filed 20 October, 1920.)
Contracts, Written — Parol Evidence — Landlord and Tenant — Leases.
Where there is a written lease between the landlord and tenant and under a separate and distinct agreement the latter has built a barn on the lands for the former, parol evidence of the agreement to build the barn is competent.
APPEAL by defendant from Daniels, J., at the second January Term, 1920, of WAKE.
This is an action to recover damages for breach of contract to build a tobacco barn for the plaintiff, who was a tenant on the land of the defendant Privett.
There was a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed.
J. S. Manning and Little Barnes for plaintiff.
Armistead Jones Son for defendants.
Parol evidence was admissible to establish the contract about the barn, although there was a written lease, because the two contracts were separate and distinct, and we are of opinion there was circumstantial evidence of authority on the part of Wall to make the contract.
The damages claimed are difficult of admeasurement, but not more so than those allowed in Spencer v. Hamilton, 113 N.C. 49, in which a counterclaim, alleging loss of crops by reason of a breach of contract to do certain ditching, was sustained.
No error.