Court Opinion

ID: 6570702
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-20 19:28:10.792872+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:56:53.756969
License: Public Domain

By the Court.

To admit this evidence would be, not only against an express provision of the statute, but against the known and established rule of evidence, at common law — that parol proof cannot be admitted to add to or vary a written contract. But, had all this been in writing, it would make no defence in the case; it could not effect the plaintiff’s right to recover at law. The defend.aiit would not certainly have been in a better situation than a mortgagor, after the day of payment is passed.
Verdict for the plaintiff, against William Webber, _ and for costs in favor of Benedict Webber, against the plaintiff.
The defendant filed a motion to redeem which was continued by agreement of the parties.