Ford v. Southern Motor Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the CourtSomerville, J.
On well-established principles of law, the bill of complaint is clearly without equity.
Conceding that J. A. Carr is, as alleged, the real owner of the note, and that he therefore had the authority to make, and did in fact make, the alleged agreement with complainant at the time he indorsed the note— viz. that the time for the paynient of the note would be extended from time to time until August 1, 1922, beyond the date of its expressed maturity—that agreement cannot be asserted either in law or in equity, because it is in violation of the elementary rule that parol contemporaneous agreements…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Nelson & Hatch v. DunnSupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
- Montgomery Rail Road v. HurstSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
- Sommerville v. StephensonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1831
- Bishop v. WoodSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
- Doss v. PetersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1886
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Jackson v. SampleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
- Dean v. LydeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931
- Rudisill Soil Pipe Co. v. Eastham Soil Pipe & Foundry Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1923
- Gafford v. TittleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
- Ison Finance Co. v. GlasgowSupreme Court of Alabama · 1957
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.