History
  • No items yet
midpage
Adams v. Thomas
54 Ala. 175
Ala.
1875
Check Treatment
BRICKELL, C. J.

The note on which the suit is founded is perfect and- complete, expressing as its consideration that it is given “for value received in the following described parcel of land,” describing it. It was not permissible for the defendant, by parol evidence, to prove that it was made on a different consideration.—Chitty on Bills, 70; West v. Kelly, 19 Ala. 353 ; Evans v. Bell, 20 Ala. 509; Hair v. Lee Brown, 10 Ala. 548 ; Beard v. White, 1 Ala. 436. The circuit court was, therefore, in error in permitting the defendant to introduce evidence that the consideration of the note was variant from that expressed. The first, second, fourth, fifth and sixth charges given by the court, are based on the evidence improperly admitted, and are, of consequence, erroneous. In the present aspect of the case, it can not well be determined *177whether the third and seventh charges, if they assert correct legal propositions, are pertinent to the issue involved.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Case Details

Case Name: Adams v. Thomas
Court Name: Supreme Court of Alabama
Date Published: Dec 15, 1875
Citation: 54 Ala. 175
Court Abbreviation: Ala.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.