This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

D owned property that was rented to P. In 1904 P, at the instance and request of D, drilled and dug a well for water. The reasonable value of the digging and casing was $250. The well was a valuable improvement upon the premises. On or about the 5th day of August, 1905, D, after having examined the said well, and in consideration of the said well to him, and of the improvement it made upon said premises, expressly ratified the acts of his said tenant in having said well drilled, and then and there promised and agreed to pay P the reasonable value of the digging and casing. D has since refused, and still refuses. to pay P anything. P sued D. D objected to the introduction of any evidence, for the reason that the complaint did not state a cause of action, in that the consideration alleged in the contract is a past consideration, and no consideration for any promise, if any was made, and no consideration for the promise alleged. D was overruled, and D excepted. D appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.