Youngblood v. Davies

TALIAFERRO, Judge.

The pleadings, the facts, and the issues in this case are clearly narrated in our former opinion (169 So. 238, 239). We-deem it unnecessary to the present opinion to restate them. Questions of law only are involved, and these are:

1. Was parol testimony admissible to prove that Judge J. E. Reynolds delivered. to plaintiffs a check of the Glassell-Hicks Company in his favor and by him indorsed, as payment on his note, owned by plaintiffs ?

2. If such testimony was admissible for 'the purposes tendered, did the payment •effected by delivery and acceptance of said ■ check, since…