Hollingsworth v. Martin
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit Court of Benton. Tried before the Hon. Tiiomas A. Walker. Assumpsit by William B. Martin, for the use of John N. Young, against Stephen P. Hollingsworth. The cause of action endorsed on the writ is said to be the following instrument in writing : “Received, Tuskaloosa, Februrary 11, 1836, of H. L. Martin, on account of William B. Martin, one hundred dollars. (Signed) S. P. Hollingsworth.”
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Benton. Tried before the Hon. Tiiomas A. Walker. Assumpsit by William B. Martin, for the use of John N. Young, against Stephen P. Hollingsworth. The cause of action endorsed on the writ is said to be the following instrument in writing : “Received, Tuskaloosa, Februrary 11, 1836, of H. L. Martin, on account of William B. Martin, one hundred dollars. (Signed) S. P. Hollingsworth.” The common counts for money had and received, and paid, laid out and expended, were added in the declaration. • It was agreed between the attorneys for the parties respectively that…
1Opinion of the CourtGibbons, J.
The defence attempted to be interposed to the liability sought to be enforced against the plaintiff' in error, is two-fold: 1st, the statute of frauds ; and 2d, that the condition attached to the promise, as shown by the evidence, has not been complied with.
The defendant below, after the testimony was all in, and consisting as it did of the evidence of one witness alone, requested the court to charge the jury, that, if they believed the evidence, the plaintiff could not recover. This charge the court refused, and the defendant excepted. The refusal to give this charge, in our opinion, raises…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Shipp v. SheltonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
- Rhodes v. OtisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1859
- Rowland & Co. v. PlummerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1874
- Morris v. HallSupreme Court of Alabama · 1868
- Stanley v. NelsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1856
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.