Legal Opinion
Penney v. Burns
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided March 9, 1933No. 8 Div. 393PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FOSTER, Justice.
It is conceded that appellant is correct in the assertion of the legal principles which he invokes to predicate a reversal. They are: Since there was no written contract of accord and satisfaction, it cannot be sustained unless it is supported by a “new consideration.” Section 5643, Code; Davis v. Anderson, 218 Ala. 557, 119 So. 670; Cotton States Life Ins. Co. v. Crozier, 218 Ala. 173, 118 So. 327; May v. Robinson, 223 Ala. 442, 136 So. 734; Ex parte Southern Cotton Oil Co., 207 Ala. 704, 93 So. 662; Reliance Life Ins. Co. v. Garth, 192 Ala. 91, 68 So. 871.
That consideration…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Hand Lumber Co. v. HallSupreme Court of Alabama · 1906
- Ex Parte Southern Cotton Oil Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1922
- Davis v. AndersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- J. H. Arnold & Co. v. GibsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927
- South Carolina Cotton Growers' Co-Op. Ass'n v. WeilSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Hamilton v. EdmundsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
- Homewood Dairy Products Co. v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1950
- Commercial Union Fire Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. ParvinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1966
- Biggers v. IngersollSupreme Court of Alabama · 1938
- Mitchell v. WalkerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1938
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.