Ex Parte Farrow

92 So. 426, 207 Ala. 197, 1922 Ala. LEXIS 35
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedFebruary 2, 1922
Docket7 Div. 270.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 92 So. 426 (Ex Parte Farrow) 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.

Bluebook
Ex Parte Farrow, 92 So. 426, 207 Ala. 197, 1922 Ala. LEXIS 35 (Ala. 1922).

Opinion

SOMERVILLE, J.

Where the terms of an invalid contract embrace recitals in the nature of admissions of fact, such recitals may be offered in evidence as admissions, in any action between the parties not grounded on the contract (as here, in an action for the value of services performed and accepted), in so far as they are relevant to the issues of the case.

This is in no sense an enforcement of the obligations of the contract, and the rule of admissibility must be regarded as well settled in this state. Smith v. Pritchett, 98 Ala. 649, 652, 13 South. 569; Eddins v. Galloway Coal Co., 205 Ala. 361, 87 South. 557; Rainey v. Capps, 22 Ala. 288, 292.

We find no error in the ruling of the Court of Appeals, and the writ of certiorari will be denied.

Writ denied.

ANDERSON, C. J., and McCLELLAN and THOMAS, JJ„ concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Hiltpold v. Stern
82 A.2d 123 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1951)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
92 So. 426, 207 Ala. 197, 1922 Ala. LEXIS 35, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-farrow-ala-1922.