Copeland v. Clark
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to Talladega Circuit Court. Tnis action was commenced in the Court below by the plaintiffs against the defendant, on a note for fifty-three dollars eighteen cents, dated 25th January, 1839. The defendant pleaded non-assumpsit; set off; payment; and failure of consideration — -judgment for defendant.
Read the full summary
Error to Talladega Circuit Court. Tnis action was commenced in the Court below by the plaintiffs against the defendant, on a note for fifty-three dollars eighteen cents, dated 25th January, 1839. The defendant pleaded non-assumpsit; set off; payment; and failure of consideration — -judgment for defendant. A bill of exceptions taken during the trial, discloses, that the defendant offered in evidence a receipt for cotton to the following effect : “January 1, 1837 — Received of Abner Clark, three thousand and eighty-six pounds of seed cotton, which is to be accounted for in settlement in store,…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
— If it be conceded that the ambiguity in the receipt, offered in evidence, could be explained by parol proof, it was not admissible in this case. The only proof of the execution of the paper is, that it was in the hand writing of Lane. This was not sufficient; as the action is brought for. the use of another; and it would in effect be allowing the declaration of Lane to be given in evidence, to defeat the action. If it could be admissible in evidence at all, it could only be on proof, that it was executed when it bears date. (See Chisholm v. Newton and Wiley, 1 Ala. Rep. N. S. 371.)
' The…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Pharis v. LeachmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1852
- Roberts v. TrawickSupreme Court of Alabama · 1848
- Thompson v. DrakeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1858
- Alabama Power Co. v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
- Head ex rel. Youngblood v. ShaverSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.