#### Thede Brothers, Appellees, v. Newton Matthews, Appellant.

Gen. No. 6,253.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Abstract of the Decision.

1. Evidence, § 107 * —when telephone conversation is admissible. A telephone conversation is admissible in evidence if the witness identified the voice, and its force would depend on whether the jury believed the witness.

2. Contracts, § 385 * —when evidence sufficient to show promise to pay for removal of building. Evidence held sufficient to sustain *508the finding of the court that defendant promised to pay plaintiffs the expense of moving a certain building from his land, in an action to recover for such expense.

*507Appeal from the Circuit Court of Peoria county; the Hon. Theodore N. Green, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1916.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed August 10, 1916.

Rehearing denied October 5, 1916.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Thede Brothers, plaintiffs, against Newton Matthews, defendant, to recover fifteen dollars for moving a building from defendant’s premises. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant appeals.

Kirk & Shurtleff, for appellant.

Frank A. Hall, for appellees.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV# and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Justice Dibell

delivered the opinion of the court.

*5083. Contracts, § 85 * —when promise to pay for removal of building is based upon sufficient consideration. Where defendant had consented that a certain building should be placed on his land, held sufficient consideration appeared for his promise to pay for its subsequent removal.