Thomas v. Barker

Decided January 15, 1861

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1861-01-15

before, the Hon. Nat, Cook, This action was brought by Stephen B. Barker, against • Benjamin R. Thomas, to recover damages for the breach of' a.-special contract, by which the plaintiff sold a negro girl to the defendant at the price of $1100, and the latter agreed' to pay plaintiff, in addition to the $1100, “one-half of what he might get-for said girl on a re-sale, over and above $1100;” the alleged breach being, that • tbe defendant resold the girl for $1400, and refused…

Relies on Hair v. Little · Dixon v. Barclay · Eckles v. Carter

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1861-01-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently March 1950

8 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

STONE, J.

¶1“ Evidence maybe received of a considera-tion not mentioned in a deed, provided it be not inconsistent with the consideration expressed in it.” — 1 Greenl. Ev. 285, 304; Jeffrey v. Walton, 1 Stark. Rep. 267.— The proof in 'this case did not change the nature or legal effect of the writing: .it only established an additional consideration, not mentioned, in tlie deed, but yet not inconsistent with it. It was properly admitted. — Dixon v. Barclay, 22 Ala. 370; Eckles & Brown v. Carter, 26 Ala. 563; Hair v. Little, 28 Ala. 236.

¶2Judgment affirmed.