Hitchcock v. Lukens
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit court of Mobile. This was an action of assumpsit, by Lukens & Son, against Hitchcock & Williams. The declaration contained two counts — one special, and one common count, for money had and received.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit court of Mobile. This was an action of assumpsit, by Lukens & Son, against Hitchcock & Williams. The declaration contained two counts — one special, and one common count, for money had and received. The special count alleged, that in consideration that the plaintiffs would relinquish their lien, acquired by execution, on a judgment against George Davis, on certain property of Davis, that the defendants promised, that as soon as the defendants should sell said property, as joint trustees of Davis, they would pay the plaintiffs. That in consideration thereof, the plaintiffs…
1Opinion of the CourtCollier, C. J.
— To authorise a party to recover-upon a contract in the declaration, alleging a special contract, *337it is 'necessary to show a contract substantially as alleged. But it is competent for a plaintiff, where no special contract is proved, if he have a good cause of action, to recover, either, in a general idebitatus assumpsit,-quan-turn meruit, or quantum, valebant, as the proof may warrant. In the present case, we are not informed by the record that there was an express contract between the parties, either special or otherwise; we will then en-quire if there was any objection to a recovery upon…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Goodridge v. LordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
3Cited by26 opinions
- McDonald v. McDonaldSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
- Allen v. M. Mendelsohn & SonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1922
- Mason v. HallSupreme Court of Alabama · 1857
- Huckabee v. MaySupreme Court of Alabama · 1848
- Webster & Wilson v. SingleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.