History
  • No items yet
midpage
Lehnert v. Lewey
142 Ala. 149
Ala.
1904
Check Treatment
TYSON, J.

Special plea numbered fo-ur (4) was subject to the demurrer interposed to it. It contains no averment that the agreement between plaintiff and Lewey to extend the time of payment was supported by ā€˜a valuable consideration. — M. & M. R. R. Co. v. Brewer, 76 Ala. 135; Scott v. Scruggs, 95 Ala. 383; Howle v. Edwards, 97 Ala. 649.

It is wholly insufficient to invoke the defense afforded under section 3884 of the Code.

*152The only objection urged against the sufficiency of plea three is that the agreement to extend the time of payment is not shown to have been for a valuable consideration. The plea expressly avers this fact. It is true it does not aver for what length of time the extension Avas given, but if this be a defect, it is not insisted upon.

Reversed and remanded.

McClellan, C. J., Simpson and Anderson, J.J., concurring.

Case Details

Case Name: Lehnert v. Lewey
Court Name: Supreme Court of Alabama
Date Published: Nov 15, 1904
Citation: 142 Ala. 149
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.