Blanton v. Blanton

MARTIN (Robert M.), Judge.

Plaintiffs contend that it was error for the trial judge to enter dismissal against them. They argue that they proved sufficient facts to entitle them to recover the monies they purportedly loaned to defendant, characterizing their action as being one in the nature of the common law count of assumpsit; specifically, plaintiffs sought to prove indebitatus assumpsit, a subcategory of the general assumpsit count, and special assumpsit.

The action of assumpsit is an action for the recovery of damages for the nonperformance of an oral or simple written contract; this…