Keep v. Kelly & Levin

29 Ala. 322
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedJune 15, 1856
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 29 Ala. 322 (Keep v. Kelly & Levin) 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
Keep v. Kelly & Levin, 29 Ala. 322 (Ala. 1856).

Opinion

STONE, J.

1. The sufficiency of the proof to sustain the plaintiff’s action in this case, is not presented in such form that we can consider it. The bill of exceptions does not purport to set out all the evidence ; and the rule in such case is, that we must presume the evidence, if set out, would sustain the charge. — Gaines v. Harvin, 19 Ala. 491.

2. The promise to indulge, copied in the bill of exceptions,is, so far as the proof discloses, without consideration and void. — Agee v. Steele, 8 Ala. 948; Morton v. Barnes, 7 Ad. & El. 19 ; Comegys v. Booth, 3 Stew. 14 ; Wilson v. Bank, 9 Ala. 847 ; Carpenter v. Devon, 6 Ala. 718.

3. The written contract offered in defense, is not the “ foundation of the suit,” and, in this case, does not import a consideration. — Code, § 2278.

There is no error in the record, and the judgment, of the circuit court is affirmed.

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

Related

Beard v. DuBose
57 So. 703 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1912)
Baker v. Patterson
55 So. 135 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1911)
Marshall v. State
32 Fla. 462 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1893)
Kirksey v. Hardaway
41 Ala. 330 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1867)
Southern Mutual Ins. v. Holcombe's Administrator
35 Ala. 327 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1859)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
29 Ala. 322, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keep-v-kelly-levin-ala-1856.