Smith v. Lamont

Indiana Court of Appeals

Smith v. Lamont

137 N.E. 620, 79 Ind. App. 209, 1923 Ind. App. LEXIS 22

Indiana Court of Appeals·Decided January 5, 1923·No. No. 11,490·Published

Opinion

Nichols, C. J.

The substantial question which appellant attempts to present in this case is as to whether parol evidence is admissible to show the real consideration in an action for breach of a general warranty.

There was no demurrer to the answer presenting the question nor was there any objection to the evidence sustaining the answer. Had the question been properly presented, it must have been decided against appellant on the authority of Allen, Admr., v. Lee (1848), 1 Ind. 58, 48 Am. Dec. 352; Pitman v. Conner (1866), 27 Ind. 337; Fitzer v. Fitzer (1868), 29 Ind. 468; Lowry v. Downey (1898), 150 Ind. 364, 50 N. E. 79; and numer[210] ous other cases, including Evans v. Bolley (1923), ante 196, 137 N. E. 619.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Nichols, C. J.

The substantial question which appellant attempts to present in this case is as to whether parol evidence is admissible to show the real consideration in an action for breach of a general warranty.

There was no demurrer to the answer presenting the question nor was there any objection to the evidence sustaining the answer. Had the question been properly presented, it must have been decided against appellant on the authority of Allen, Admr., v. Lee (1848), 1 Ind. 58, 48 Am. Dec. 352; Pitman v. Conner (1866), 27 Ind. 337; Fitzer v. Fitzer (1868), 29 Ind. 468; Lowry v. Downey (1898), 150 Ind. 364, 50 N. E. 79; and numer[210] ous other cases, including Evans v. Bolley (1923), ante 196, 137 N. E. 619.

Judgment affirmed.

Smith v. Lamont, 137 N.E. 620, 79 Ind. App. 209, 1923 Ind. App. LEXIS 22 (Ind. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

137 N.E. 620 (Smith v. Lamont) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related