Plunkett v. Roehm

Citations

• 12 Pa. Super. 83
• 1899 Pa. Super. LEXIS 212

Syllabus

<p>Affidavit of defense — Promissory note — Evidence of parol agreement.</p> <p>An affidavit of defense properly was held insufficient which set up as a defense to a promissory note a parol agreement touching a matter in regard to which the parties could not make a contract.</p> <p>Parol evidence of agreement inducing — Execution of promissory note.</p> <p>Parol evidence is inadmissible in a suit on a promissory note to show that it was in payment of rent of a third party and that when the note was given its payment was to be considered conditional upon the award of a license to a third party who had .applied therefor.</p> <p>The case does not come within any of the exceptions which would take it outside of the rule of Martin v. Berens, 67 Pa. 459.</p>