Durland v. Pitcairn

The assignment of errors calls in question the sufficiency of the first and second paragraphs of the complaint and the first and second paragraphs of the answer.

The action was by appellee against appellant. The complaint consisted of two paragraphs, the first of which was as follows:

“Par. 1. The said plaintiff, Hugh Pitcairn, complains of the said defendant, Albert O. Durland, and says that on the 1st day of May, 1872, the plaintiff had an interest in a contract made and entered into between Charles G. Perkins and said Durland, of the one part, and the Evansville, Henderson and Nashville…