Carter v. Provo

The only question raised by the exceptions is whether the evidence tends to show a valid contract.

The defence of the statute of frauds is not maintainable. If it might be raised for the first time after the verdict, the defendant did not promise to pay or be answerable for a debt of the estate. His agreement was to divide his share therein with the plaintiff if she would cancel her claim against it. In effect, he bought a rejection of the claim. It was surrendered on the strength of his promise.

If the plaintiff furnished any consideration for the promise, the promise was enforceable. The…