Ragland v. Wynn's Adm'r

Supreme Court of Alabama

Ragland v. Wynn's Adm'r

37 Ala. 32

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedJune 15, 1860

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 37 Ala. 32 (Ragland v. Wynn's Adm'r) 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

Ragland v. Wynn's Adm'r, 37 Ala. 32 (Ala. 1860).

Pincite

Opinion

R. W. WALKER, J.

The promise of The defendants,, being founded on a new consideration, beneficial to the promisor, was an original undertaking, and not within the statute .of frauds.—Martin v. Black, 21 Ala. 309 ; Blount v. Harkins, 19 Ala. 100.

[2.,]. The bill of exceptions does not expressly state that tbe agreement.between the parties was made, and tbe [35]*35■decree credited in pursuance of it, before the commencement of this suit. But it is shown-that these transactions occurred while Lawson was sheriff of Talladega county ; and we judicially know'that he ceased to be such sheriff in 1854, nearly.two years before this suit was instituted.

We think that the evidence set out in the bill of exceptions shows a valid contract, and its breach, and that the •court did not err in the charge given.

Judgment, affirmed..

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

R. W. WALKER, J.

The promise of The defendants,, being founded on a new consideration, beneficial to the promisor, was an original undertaking, and not within the statute .of frauds.—Martin v. Black, 21 Ala. 309 ; Blount v. Harkins, 19 Ala. 100.

[2.,]. The bill of exceptions does not expressly state that tbe agreement.between the parties was made, and tbe [35]*35■decree credited in pursuance of it, before the commencement of this suit. But it is shown-that these transactions occurred while Lawson was sheriff of Talladega county ; and we judicially know'that he ceased to be such sheriff in 1854, nearly.two years before this suit was instituted.

We think that the evidence set out in the bill of exceptions shows a valid contract, and its breach, and that the •court did not err in the charge given.

Judgment, affirmed..

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 Ala. 32, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ragland-v-wynns-admr-ala-1860.

Opinion

R. W. WALKER, J.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack