Leonard v. Greenleaf
New Mexico Supreme Court
Appeal from District Court, Bernalillo County; Raynolds, Judge. Action by W. C. Leonard and another against V. A. Greenleaf. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiffs appeal. Account stated was first known to law merchant prior to middle of 18th century. 1 T. R. 40; 1 C. J. 679; 3 Pick. 96. It constitutes a separate and distinct contract, and separate items thereof cannot be inquired into.
Read the full summary
Appeal from District Court, Bernalillo County; Raynolds, Judge. Action by W. C. Leonard and another against V. A. Greenleaf. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiffs appeal. Account stated was first known to law merchant prior to middle of 18th century. 1 T. R. 40; 1 C. J. 679; 3 Pick. 96. It constitutes a separate and distinct contract, and separate items thereof cannot be inquired into. Bartlett v. Emery, 1 T. B. 42; 1 C. J. 606; Brown & Manzanaras Co. v. Gise, 14 N. M. 282; Auzerias v. Deglee, 15 Pac. 371; 1 A. & E. Ency. Law, 437; C. J., p. 678; Curran v. Hubbard, 144 Pac. 83; Lyell v. Walbach,…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OP THE COURT.
HANNA, J.
(after stating the facts as above.) — The assignments of error .raise substantially two questions— the first being whether the original items of an account, which go to make up an account stated, can be inquired into by demand and allowance of a bill of particulars after the account has been converted into an account stated; and, second, what constitutes a sufficient bill of particulars. Appellee contends that the first question is not presented for our consideration because no proper exception was taken to the order of the court ordering the bill of particulars.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Auzerais v. NagleeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Comer & Co. v. Way & EdmundsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1894
- Martin v. HeinzeMontana Supreme Court · 1904
- Matthews v. . HubbardNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Stebbins v. NilesMississippi Supreme Court · 1852
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Hinkle, Cox, Eaton, Coffield & Hensley v. Cadle Co. of Ohio, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1993
- Tabet Lumber Company v. ChalamidasNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1971
- Brown v. CoryNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1967
- Gordon Stores Co. v. RubinNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1935
- Capps v. RatcliffNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1959
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.