24 Ala. 381 | Ala. | 1854
The principles governing the questions presented in the present record, were, in our opinion, substantially settled in the case of Clements v. Loggins, 2 Ala. 514. In
Wo have but to apply the principle here decided to the case at bar, to show that the court erred in its charge to the jury. The doctrine of tho charge, as given to the jury, was, that after the plaintiff had bought the note, and after the defendant had said to tho plaintiff that tho note was all right, and he had no off-set to it, nothing that could subsequently transpire as between the original parties to the note could create a valid defence to the defendant as against the plaintiff. This is the precise question decided in the caso cited from 2 Ala. There the rescission of the contract for the sale of land did not take place until long after the plaintiff had acquired the notes, and after a conversation very similar to that which took placo between tho plaintiff and defendant in the case at bar; and yet the court decided, that the defence could be made, if tho defendant had acted fairly and honestly in his replies, which he had given on being applied to by the plaintiff for information in regard to the notes when about to purchase them.
The charge asked by the defendant, in our opinion, asserted a correct proposition of law, and should have been given.
.Let the judgment of the court below be reversed, and the cause remanded.