Williams v. Killen

CARR, Presiding Judge.

This appeal is from a judgment below in favor of plaintiff in a suit on a promissory note.

Appellant contends that the note was improperly allowed in evidence because subsequent to its execution and without his consent the note was materially altered. Title 39, Sec. 121, Subsec. 2, Code 1940; Title 7, Sec. 430, Code 1940.

*448The claimed alteration or addition consists in this: “interest six percent from date.”

The evidence in -this aspect is in dispute, and the merit of the claim was properly submitted to the jury for determination. Moore v. Williamson, 210 Ala. 427, 98 So.…