Wallace v. Workman
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Daviess Circuit Court. — Hon. A. B. Davis, Judge. (1) The demurrer should have been sustained as the promise, pleaded, was a mere voluntary undertaking made without consideration, and was not binding on either party. Laclede Con. Co. v. Tudor I. W-, 169 Mo. 137. (2) An agreement by a creditor to extend the time of payment must be supported by a sufficient consideration.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Daviess Circuit Court. — Hon. A. B. Davis, Judge. (1) The demurrer should have been sustained as the promise, pleaded, was a mere voluntary undertaking made without consideration, and was not binding on either party. Laclede Con. Co. v. Tudor I. W-, 169 Mo. 137. (2) An agreement by a creditor to extend the time of payment must be supported by a sufficient consideration. Therefore, as a natural corollary to that proposition, an agreement by a debtor to pay a note before maturity must be supported by a sufficient consideration. Randolph on Com. Paper, sec. 492; Nichols v. Douglas, 8…
1Opinion of the CourtTrimble, J.
Plaintiff. owed defendant a note of $15000 secured by deed of trust on the former’s farm. The note had some two and one-half years to run before it would fall due or payment could be enforced. Desiring to call in said loan and obtain the money represented by the note, defendant requested plaintiff .to pay it off, and agreed that if plaintiff would do so, he, defendant, would receive the money, surrender the note, and release the deed of trust whenever plaintiff had obtained a new loan of the amount required, defendant well knowing that if plaintiff did pay off the note at that time he would…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Crone v. StindeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1900
- Hammond v. BeesonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- Underwood Typewriter Co. v. Century Realty Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- Chenoweth v. Pacific Express Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1902
- Houck v. FrisbeeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Cox v. A. P. Green Fire Brick Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1934
- Bird v. BilbyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1919
- Malloy v. Egyptian Tie & Timber Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1923