Kirksey v. Kirksey
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit Court of Talladega. Assumpsit by the defendant, against the plaintiff in error. The question is presented in this Court, upon a case agreed, which shows the following facts: The plaintiff was the wife of defendant’s brother, but had for sometime been a widow, and had several children.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Talladega. Assumpsit by the defendant, against the plaintiff in error. The question is presented in this Court, upon a case agreed, which shows the following facts: The plaintiff was the wife of defendant’s brother, but had for sometime been a widow, and had several children. In 1840, the plaintiff resided on public land, under a contract of lease, she ha’d held over, and was comfortably settled, and would have attempted to secure the land she lived on. The defendant resided in Talladega county, some sixty, or seventy miles off. On the 10th October, 1840, he…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
The inclination of my mind, is, that the loss and inconvenience, which the plaintiff sustained in breaking up, and moving to the defendant’s, a distance of sixty miles, is a sufficient consideration to support the promise, to furnish her with a house, and land to cultivate, until she could raise her family. My brothers, however think, that the promise on the part of the defendant, was a mere gratuity, and that an action will not lie for its breach. The judgment of the Court below must therefore be reversed, pursuant to the agreement of the parties.
2Cited by12 opinions
- Hubbard v. AllenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
- Bibb v. FreemanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
- Erwin v. ErwinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1854
- Langer v. Superior Steel Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Hawkins v. HudsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1871
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.