Stewart v. Perkins

In the majority opinion (incognito per curiam), a statement is made that the averment in plaintiff’s petition that the defendant Stewart had executed in writing a new promise to pay the balance due on said note in January, 1939, which promise defendant has failed to perform, is “not to be construed as any part of plaintiff’s cause of action on this appeal, no proof having been adduced thereon.” I regret my inability to comprehend the force of the majority’s conclusion. .■

The “new promise” is the essence of plaintiff’s lawsuit and the controlling element in this appeal, without which,…