# Thomas v. Barker

> Supreme Court of Alabama · January 15, 1861 · 37 Ala. 392

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6506902

## Case

- **Full name:** THOMAS v. BARKER
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Alabama
- **Decided:** January 15, 1861
- **Citations:** 37 Ala. 392
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Stone
- **Judges:** Stone
- **Cited by:** 9 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6506902

## Opinion text

STONE, J.
“ 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 .
Judgment affirmed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6506902. Public record. Not legal advice.