Beard v. White
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit Court of Tuscaloosa county. ASSUMPSIT on a promissory note. Plea, non assumpsit; verdict and judgment for plaintiff below. From a bill of exceptions, taken in the cause, it appears that one Palmer made a parol contract with the plaintiff in error, for the sale of a tract of land, and put him in possession.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Tuscaloosa county. ASSUMPSIT on a promissory note. Plea, non assumpsit; verdict and judgment for plaintiff below. From a bill of exceptions, taken in the cause, it appears that one Palmer made a parol contract with the plaintiff in error, for the sale of a tract of land, and put him in possession. After his death, the contract not having been reduced to writing, the plaintiff in error executed two notes for the purchase money of the land, to one Job Going, administrator of Palmer; one for six hundred dollars, payable in a short time; and the other, which is the…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
— No principle of law, is more frequently the subject of consideration in this Court, than the rule of evidence which governs this case, that parol testimony cannot be heard, to add to or diminish a written contract. Exceptions have been engrafted on the rule, which are as well settled as the rule itself; as, for example, that a latent ambiguity, may be explained by parol proof. It is not contended that this case falls within any of the established exceptions to the rule; but that the parol testimony offered, should have been received, because it merely superadded a condition, as to which the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Ford v. Southern Motor Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1922
- Munde v. LambieMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- Adams v. ThomasSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
- Knox v. Rivers Bros.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1923