Tremain v. Edwards
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action of assumpsit on the common counts. At the trial in the court of common pleas, before Byington, J., it appeared by the report of an auditor, to whom the case, had been referred, that the action was brought by the plaintiff, formerly the keeper of a hotel in North Adams, against the defendant, an engineer, for the board of himself and men, while surveying a route for a railroad.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit on the common counts. At the trial in the court of common pleas, before Byington, J., it appeared by the report of an auditor, to whom the case, had been referred, that the action was brought by the plaintiff, formerly the keeper of a hotel in North Adams, against the defendant, an engineer, for the board of himself and men, while surveying a route for a railroad. The plaintiff was allowed by the auditor to prove his demand by his book of account, containing his original entries, on which the meals supplied to the defendant and his men were charged from day to…
1Opinion of the CourtDewey, J.
1. The court are of opinion that, under a declaration in indebitatus assumpsit, containing the common counts, for goods sold and delivered, labor and services done and performed, and money paid and expended, the plaintiff may recover for board furnished the defendant and his servants. Witter v. Witter, 10 Mass. 223.
2. It was objected that the account book of the plaintiff was not competent evidence, as, from the very nature of the case, there was better evidence to be derived from the persons whose board was the subject of the account. Generally speaking, the position is a sound one, that a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Witter v. WitterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
3Cited by1 opinion
- Flannigan v. Monongahela Tie & Lumber Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1915