Contract, Parties. In an action by an attorney at law to recover for services in examining the title to certain land, it appeared, that the defendant was the owner of the land and applied to one H. for a loan upon a mortgage thereof, and that he signed an application in writing for the loan addressed to H. by which he agreed in consideration of the acceptance of his application "to pay to the counsel appointed by them his charges for the examination of the title and for conveyancing." The plaintiff, who had examined the title under the above arrangement, asked for a ruling that the provision above quoted constituted a contract between him and the defendant on which he was entitled to recover. Held, that the ruling asked for could not be made, as the written promise was addressed to H. and was upon a consideration to move from him. Whether on the facts in the case a contract might have been found to have been made between the plaintiff and the defendant on the terms of the clause quoted, was not open, as the only exception was to the refusal to give the ruling requested as above.
BY THE COURT.
The ruling asked was that as matter of law the written application, or one clause of it, constituted a contract with the plaintiff. The question whether on the facts a contract might be found to have been made between the plaintiff and defendant on the terms of that clause is not open. We have to do only with the construction of the written paper. It is quite plain that the ruling asked could not be made. The written promise must be read as made to Herlihy. The whole document is addressed to him in terms, and the consideration contemplated as the inducement of the promise is to move from him.
Exceptions overruled.