The contract between the plaintiff and defendant, followed by the release of the Reddy Brothers, constituted a “novation;” and it was not, on the part of defendant, a mere promise to answer for the “debt, default or miscarriage of another,” nor required to be in writing by the Statute of Frauds. (Civil Code, 1530.)

Judgment and order denying new trial affirmed, with ten per cent, damages. Remittitur forthwith.

Mr. Justice Rhodes did not express an opinion.