Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

6 Ala. 415

Hester v. Wesson

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 15, 1844

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1844-01-15

<p>1. A promise by an administratrix, to pay a debt due by her intestate, is not bind* infi on her individually, although it be in writing, there being no now consideration for the promise.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1844-01-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently November 1899

5 state decisions

20184418501860187018801890decided

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 →

ORMOND, J.

¶1This action is on a note made by the plaintiff in error, the consideration of which was a debt due by the estate of her intestate. It does not appear that there was any new consideration of harm to the promissee, or benefit to the promissor; and it is, therefore, a promise by the adm’rx to pay the debt of her intestate, which, although in writing, being without consideration, is void by the statute of frauds. This has been considered the settled construction of the statute, ever since the decision in the case of Rann v. Hughes, determined in the House of Lords. [See the case in 7 Term Rep. 350, note.]

¶2The judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded.

/6/ala/415 · .json · Public domain