Wilson v. Alcatraz Asphalt Co.

Contract to Furnish Oil—Action for Price—Counterclaim—Damage for Breach of Contract—Instruction as to Verdict.—Under a contract to furnish oil to the defendant, which was broken by the plaintiff, who has sued to recover the price of oil furnished, the defendant is entitled to counterclaim the extra cost to the defendant of procuring oil from other parties to satisfy the contract, and where such extra cost exceeded the amount sued for, the court properly directed the jury to return a verdict for the defendant for the difference between such extra cost and the price of the oil furnished.

Id.—Construction of Contract.—The contract, and each and every clause thereof, must be read together, so as to arrive at its true intent and meaning, and where the contract recites that, unless for certain excepted causes, plaintiff shall be unable to supply the oil demanded by the contract, plaintiff shall at all times be required to furnish the same, the contract excludes all other causes by implication, and the plaintiff must supply the oil required by the contract by the delivery of oil produced by other parties, where such delivery is not stipulated against.

Id.—Possibility op Performance.—If the performance of a contract is possible and lawful, and there is no impossibility in the nature of the thing to be done, the failure to perform it is none the less a breach, although the obligor himself may become wholly unable to perform; and he must make compensation in damages for such breach, though the performance was rendered impracticable, or even impossible, by some unforeseen cause for which no provision is made and over which he had no control, but against which he might have provided in the contract.

Id.—Evidence—Harmless Ruling.—The admission of evidence as to certain letters and invoices which were in harmony with the construction put upon the language of the contract by the court, if immaterial, was harmless.