12 Ind. 561 | Ind. | 1859
Suit upon the following agreement:
“ #900. On or before the 1st day of April next, I promise
' The complaint averred that the receipt was executed and the collaterals delivered, but that the notes were not assigned over.
Answer, denying the execution of the receipt and the delivery of the collaterals.
On the trial, the Court permitted parol evidence of the receipt. This was error. If the receipt was upon the record of the judgment, the record, or a transcript of it, should have been produced. If the receipt was not upon the record, but was upon a separate paper, and delivered to the defendant, notice should have been given to him to produce it on the trial, and on his failure to do so, the contents might have been proved by parol.
In the assessment of damages, the Court held that they should be for the sum expressed on the face of the written agreement. According to the case of Parks v. Marshall, 10 Ind. R. 20, and the authorities there cited, the value of the notes to be assigned, as found by a jury, would be the measure of damages.
The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded for another trial.