- -18
petitioner. Mr. Pisano was a witness in this case, but he was
not asked and did not state whether he understood that Nikki's
was to pay for tires for any of the trucks it leased to
petitioner when he signed the lease on behalf of petitioner. He
did say that for petitioner's fiscal year ending in 1990,
petitioner had its busiest time and leased about 48 trucks from
Nikki's, and he also stated that he furnished to Kurt Caillier
his estimate of the number of tires the trucks operated by
petitioner would use in a year. However, he was not asked and
did not testify as to the number of tires he determined would be
used for the 48 trucks in a year. This lack of evidence is
particularly important in evaluating whether there was a mistake
in the lease agreement since petitioner was billed by Gillette
Tire for 993 tires at a cost of $387,637.30, but an adjustment to
the account was made on May 30, 1990. The inference from this
adjustment is that petitioner was no longer liable for the charge
for these tires.
The record also shows that it was not uncommon for one of
the Caillier-owned corporations to pay expenses of another and
make adjustments on the books of the corporations involved.
Not only is there no strong proof in this case that the
provision that Nikki's pay for the tires on the trucks rented to
petitioner was a mistake; the evidence as a whole indicates that
it was not a mistake in the agreement the parties entered into.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011