The trial court purported to grant relief under Count I which would imply a finding that a contract did, in fact, exist. Plaintiff alleges four points of error in this appeal. Since the third and fourth points are dispositive, we need not discuss the other two. In her third and fourth points, Plaintiff contends that the trial court erred in finding that she and Coop did not enter into an enforceable oral agreement, and in not ordering specific performance. She also argues in her fourth point that the trial court erred in not awarding her damages.
Parol evidence is admissible to prove the terms of an oral contract.
F.C. Preuitt Const. Consideration may consist of some right, interest, profit or benefit accruing to one party, or some forbearance, loss or responsibility, given, suffered or undertaken by the other. The record establishes the oral contract relied on by Plaintiff. Although no issue is raised on this appeal concerning it, the record also establishes the authority of Wellington to enter into the contract in Coop's behalf. It is significant, however, that Coop has the statutory authority to condemn for right of way.