Gaines v. Shelton
Supreme Court of Alabama
.Appeal from the Circuit Court of Greene. Tried before the Hon. Luther R. Smith. This was an action of debt by the payee against the makers of a promissory note, for $200, dated 28th of January, 1860, and payable January 1st, 1861. The complaint pursues the form laid down in the Revised Code in such a case. Defendants pleaded in short by consent, “ general issue; want of consideration; failure of consideration, and frauds.”
Read the full summary
.Appeal from the Circuit Court of Greene. Tried before the Hon. Luther R. Smith. This was an action of debt by the payee against the makers of a promissory note, for $200, dated 28th of January, 1860, and payable January 1st, 1861. The complaint pursues the form laid down in the Revised Code in such a case. Defendants pleaded in short by consent, “ general issue; want of consideration; failure of consideration, and frauds.” There was a jury trial, and verdict for the plaintiff. Plaintiff offered in evidence an instrument, of which the following is a copy: “ ‘ $200 Greene County, Ala., 28th…
1Opinion of the Court
PETES,S, J.
1. There can be no doubt, that such an instrument as this contains several stipulations, a breach of any one of which would constitute a cause of action and in declaring on it the plaintiff may assign a breach on any single one of them. — Rev. Code, § 2633. The first stipulation of the contract above set out is a promissory note, and it has been so treated by this court from an early day. — McRae v. Raser, 9 Port. 122; S. C. 5 Smith Cond. Ala. Rep. 435; Winston v. Metcalf, 7 Ala. 837; Story on Prom. Notes, p. 1., There was, then, no error in overruling this objection.
2. The…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- McCulloch v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
- Paysant v. WareSupreme Court of Alabama · 1840
- Long v. DavisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1851
- Wolfe v. ParhamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1850
- Ricks v. DillahuntySupreme Court of Alabama · 1838
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Reader v. HelmsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1876