Holmes v. Suffrin

<p>Abstract of the Decision.</p> <p>1. Contracts, § 385*—when evidence sufficient to show promise to pay. In an action by a subcontractor against the owner of the property, evidence examined and held sufficient to warrant a finding that defendant had promised to pay the amount due and to become due under the subcontract.</p> <p>2. Frauds, Statute of, § 12*—when manner in which account charged evidence of original promise. In an action by a subcontractor against the owner of the property to recover the amount due for work done by plaintiff, where it is claimed that the work was done under a promise- of defendant to pay, evidence that the account was charged on plaintiff’s books, to the principal contractor, while strong evidence, when unexplained, to show that the credit was given to the latter, is not conclusive of the fact.</p> <p>3. Frauds, Statute of, § 2*—when debtor not released by oral promise. A valid oral promise may be made with regard to the debt of a third person without releasing the original debtor.</p> <p>4. Frauds, Statute of, § 126*—when evidence sufficient to show promise to be original. In an action by a subcontractor against the owner of the property to recover on a promise to pay for the work done under the contract, evidence examined and held sufficient to warrant a finding that the promise was direct and original and not within the Statute of Frauds.</p>