Is Promissory Note to Pay School Tuition a ''Special Contract'' ?
In Texas Military College v. Taylor, 275 S.W. 1089, 1091 (Tex. Civ. App.--Beaumont 1925, no writ), a parent who signed a promissory note to pay the school's tuition contended that the school entered into a special contract with him that was different from the terms contained in the catalogue that his tuition notes would be forgiven if his asthmatic son were unable to complete the semester due to his health. Id.
The school argued that its catalogue constituted a binding written contract that could not be questioned by verbal testimony. Id.
While the court agreed with that general proposition so long as entrance is had under the terms of the contract.
Vidor v. Peacock, 145 S.W. 672, (Tex. Civ. App.--San Antonio 1912);
Peirce v. Peacock Military College 220 S.W. 191 (Tex. Civ. App.--San Antonio 1920);
Aynesworth v. Peacock Military College, 225 S.W. 866 (Tex. Civ. App.--Amarillo 1920);
Peacock Military College v. Hughes, 225 S.W. 221 (Tex. Civ. App.--San Antonio 1920);
Peacock Military College v. Scroggins, 223 S.W. 232 (Tex. Civ. App.--San Antonio 1920), it held that the school could also enter into a special verbal contract under which entrance could be had, and in that situation, evidence of the verbal contract would certainly be admissible to show its terms. Id.