The defendants contend that the notation made by Mr. Brownson
in the memo section of his earnest money check, in which he wrote the sale was "contingent on getting financial [sic]," was a term of the oral agreement. We find that it was not... [The plaintiff] testified that when he made the notation on the check and handed it to [the defendant], he asked, "Is this okay?" However,
there is nothing in the record indicating that he directed her attention to the notation or attempted to discuss it with her. In rendering its judgment from the bench, the trial court found as follows:
that notation on the check — First of all, it isn't very clear as to what exactly it means. So that's a problem there. The evidence that I've heard, I would find that that was not discussed and agreed by the parties. So there was no discussion and agreement about that, or, at least, no agreement, and very little, if any, discussion at all.
We find that the evidence does not preponderate against the trial court's finding that this so-called contingency was
not a term of the oral contract.