Supove et al. v. Densmoor et ux., 225 Or. 365

Summary

The Oregon Supreme Court considered whether a written agreement for engineering and drafting costs should be reformed based on mutual mistake or fraud. The court held that the defendant failed to establish reformation by clear and convincing evidence and concluded that the agreement required payment for the plaintiff's services. The decree was reversed and remanded with directions to award Supove $1,474.27.

Holdings

1. Reformation was improper because defendants failed to prove fraud or mutual mistake by clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence.
2. Defendants were liable to pay Supove $1,474.27 for the engineering and drafting services because the agreement made payment due unless Sunderland built the building for $60,000 and entered into the construction contract, and that condition did not occur.
3. The parties' stipulation authorized the trial court to hear and decide the entire legal and equitable controversy in a single proceeding, and the Supreme Court could review the legal issues de novo in the equity appeal and direct entry of judgment.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to justify reformation of the written agreement for mutual mistake or fraud.
2. Whether the written agreement required defendants to pay Supove's engineering and drafting costs when the proposed building could not be constructed for $60,000.
3. Whether the Supreme Court could decide the legal issues and direct entry of judgment after the parties stipulated to try the equitable and legal issues together without a jury.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded