Brown ex rel. Clardy v. Brown
Supreme Court of Missouri
Jippeal from Sixth District Court. I. A verbal promise to pay the debt of another is invalid in all cases, unless the debt is extinguished and the new promise accepted in its stead.
Read the full summary
Jippeal from Sixth District Court. I. A verbal promise to pay the debt of another is invalid in all cases, unless the debt is extinguished and the new promise accepted in its stead. (Jackson v. Rayner, 12 Johns. 291; Campbell v. Tindley, 3 Humph. 330; 3 Ghandi., Wis., 31; 9 Verm. 136 ; 15 Verm. 215; 2 Mete. 423 ; 15 Pick. 159; 18 Pick. 369; Mundy v. Ross, 3 Green, N. J., 466.) H. The court erred in striking out that part of the defendants’ answer setting up as a defense the previous relinquishment of dower by Mrs. Laura Brown, in the deed of trust to Craddock, for the benefit of Lewis P.…
1Opinion of the CourtBliss, Judge
The defendants were creditors of the husband of Laura S. Brown, and, being in failing circumstances, he proposed to execute to their use a trust deed of valuable real estate belonging to him. Mrs. Brown declined to release her dower, and claims to have consented to do so only upon the agreement by defendants to pay a certain debt from her husband to said Clardy, which had not been otherwise provided for. The defendants, having bid in the property at trustees’ sale, refuse to pay the Clardy debt, and this suit is prosecuted to enforce their agreement to do so. The defendants denied the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Barker v. BucklinNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- Pratt v. HumphreySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1852
- Howard v. CoshowSupreme Court of Missouri · 1862
- Westfall v. ParsonsNew York Supreme Court · 1853
3Cited by9 opinions
- Hedden v. SchneblinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907
- Moore v. McHaneyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1915
- Hafford v. SmithMissouri Court of Appeals · 1963
- Patton v. MillsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1878
- Rossen v. RiceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1935
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.