Legal Opinion · Concurrence

West End Furniture Co. v. Norman

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided December 27, 1919Published

Action to recover for goods sold and delivered, in District Court, Grand Forks County, Cooley, J. From judgment entered upon a directed verdict of dismissal the plaintiff has appealed. “In no case can the plaintiff recover on the general counts where the special agreement (executory) continues in force.”

Read the full summary

Action to recover for goods sold and delivered, in District Court, Grand Forks County, Cooley, J. From judgment entered upon a directed verdict of dismissal the plaintiff has appealed. “In no case can the plaintiff recover on the general counts where the special agreement (executory) continues in force.” Lindingdale v. Livingston, 10 Johns. 37. “When the terms of a special contract have been so far performed that nothing remains but a mere debt or duty to pay money, the amount due may be recovered under a general count.” See note in 2 Ene. PL & Pr. p. 991, under title “Special Contract…

1Concurrence

Christianson, Oh. J.

(concurring specially). I agree with Judge Robinson that the trial court erred in dismissing this action. The complaint alleged: “That on and between the 16th day of June, 1916, and the 15th day of May, 1917, it (plaintiff) sold and delivered to defendant a large amount of goods, wares, and merchandise, consisting of furniture and accessories, upon which there was a balance due on January 1, 1918, of $566.95; that the said sum, although duly demanded, has not been paid, nor has any part thereof.” The answer, among other things, averred: “Defendant admits the purchase of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Lowe v. JensenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Yancey v. BoyceNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1914

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API