Bozeman v. Rushing
This text of 51 Ala. 529 (Bozeman v. Rushing) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
B. F. SAFFOLD, J.
The charge of the court was correct. Giving up a suit, or any equivalent proceedings, instituted to try a question, the legal result of which is doubtful, is a good consideration for a promise to pay a sum of money for an abandonment thereof. Inequality of consideration does not constitute a valid objection, if there be an actual controversy, of which the issue may fairly be considered by both párties as doubtful. 1 Parsons on Contracts, m. p. 426, 427; Maull v. Vaughn, 45 Ala. 134. Notwithstanding Confederate money loaned entered into the consideration of the note in suit, the corn purchased constituted the largest proportion of the consideration, and the dismissal of the attachment suit was an essential part of it. Curry v. Davis, 44 Ala. 281. We have not held Confederate money to be an illegal consideration, vitiating contracts into which its use entered, on the ground of public policy. The judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
51 Ala. 529, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bozeman-v-rushing-ala-1874.