Whitwell v. Brigham
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Assumpsit. The declaration contained but one count; in which however were combined all the common money counts. Upon a case stated it appeared, that on the 28th of August, 1835, the defendant drew six bills of exchange on the plaintiffs, each for $ 5000, payable four months after date to the defendant’s own order.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. The declaration contained but one count; in which however were combined all the common money counts. Upon a case stated it appeared, that on the 28th of August, 1835, the defendant drew six bills of exchange on the plaintiffs, each for $ 5000, payable four months after date to the defendant’s own order. The defendant had not then, and has never since had, any funds in the hands of the plaintiffs, unless the promissory note of N. P. Denny and others, mentioned below, is to be considered as funds. The bills were accepted in consideration of a promissory note given to them by the…
1Opinion of the Court
Morton J.
delivered the opinion of the Court. The declaration, which is general, combining in one count all the common counts, is undoubtedly good. It is said that we are indebted, for the length of many of our English precedents, to the mode of compensation. But as American pleaders and scriveners are not paid by the page, it is for their interest to abridge rather than prolong, and the effect of this may be seen *121in. the abbreviation of the forms of all our proceedings. And this labor-saving propensity, so long as it does not sacrifice perspicuity to brevity, may well be indulged. One count…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Knickerbocker Trust Co. v. CoyleU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1905
- Darling v. N.Y., P. B.R.R. Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1892
- Darling v. New York, Providence & Boston RailroadSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1892