Frauds, Statute of. An oral promise by the owner of a house in process of construction to accept and pay an order in writing for the price of materials for the house drawn upon him by a contractor, who has agreed to build the house and has made a contract to purchase the materials from the payee of the order, which still is in force, is a promise to answer for the debt of another within R.L.c. 74, § 1, cl. 2, which cannot be enforced if that statute is pleaded.
HAMMOND, J.
The declaration sets out that the plaintiffs "desired greater security for their account than the credit of" Crockwell, with whom they had made a contract to supply the inside finish and flooring for the defendant's house. They were still to hold Crockwell. There was no novation, as in cases like Griffin v. Cunningham, 183 Mass. 505. The real contract, therefore, set out in the declaration was an oral contract to pay the debt of another, and was within the statute of frauds. O'Connell v. Mount Holyoke College, 174 Mass. 511, and cases cited.
Judgment affirmed.