History
  • No items yet
midpage
Keep v. Kelly & Levin
29 Ala. 322
Ala.
1856
Check Treatment
STONE, J.

1. The sufficiency of the proof to sustain the plaintiff’s action in this case, is not presented in such form that we can consider it. The bill of exceptions does not purport to set out all the evidence ; and the rule in such case is, that we must presume the evidence, if set out, would sustain the charge. — Gaines v. Harvin, 19 Ala. 491.

2. The promise to indulge, copied in the bill of exceptions,is, so far as the proof discloses, without consideration and void. — Agee v. Steele, 8 Ala. 948; Morton v. Barnes, 7 Ad. & El. 19 ; Comegys v. Booth, 3 Stew. 14 ; Wilson v. Bank, 9 Ala. 847 ; Carpenter v. Devon, 6 Ala. 718.

3. The written contract offered in defense, is not the “ foundation of the suit,” and, in this case, does not import a consideration. — Code, § 2278.

There is no error in the record, and the judgment, of the circuit court is affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Keep v. Kelly & Levin
Court Name: Supreme Court of Alabama
Date Published: Jun 15, 1856
Citation: 29 Ala. 322
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.