As applied to this case, it would leave its determination to be controlled by which side could obtain the most letters from persons approving or disapproving of the use of sound cars as a method of advertising. See Kolodig v. Highland Park State Bank, 226 Mich. 197. Appellant contends that the court erred in refusing to admit in evidence a newspaper clipping which purported to quote statements made by appellant as to how he had assisted in the construction of the advertising car and the reception it had been accorded in various parts of the country.
" Webber v. Hayes, 117 Mich. 256, 261. See, also, Kolodig v. Highland Park State Bank, 226 Mich. 197, 199. Plaintiff argues that the letters were admissible under the rule stated in Hardy v. Tittabawassee Boom Co., 52 Mich. 45, which case counsel says is "on all fours" with the instant case.
Plaintiff's testimony as to the passbook and the return of the money to him, offered in variance and contradiction of the terms of the written contract, was properly excluded. The first proposition is ruled by Kolodig v. Highland Park State Bank, 226 Mich. 197, and the second by Karnov v. Goldman, 229 Mich. 551. Judgment is affirmed.
Axe v. Tolbert, 179 Mich. 556. Evidence of the claimed oral agreement ought not to have gone to the jury. On the competent evidence the case is like Kolodig v. Highland Park State Bank, 226 Mich. 197, where a directed verdict for defendant was sustained. Judgment reversed with direction to enter judgment for defendants, with costs.