Gainer & Co. v. Pollock & Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Geneva. Tried before the Hon. J. M. CaRmichael. This was an action by J. Pollock & Co., a partnership composed of Jacob Pollock and Leopold Lowenstein, against W. H. Gainer & Bro., a partnership composed of W. H. Gainer and James Gainer. The complaint contained only the common counts, on an account, on an account stated, and for goods, wares and merchandise sold by the plaintiffs to the defendants at their request.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Geneva. Tried before the Hon. J. M. CaRmichael. This was an action by J. Pollock & Co., a partnership composed of Jacob Pollock and Leopold Lowenstein, against W. H. Gainer & Bro., a partnership composed of W. H. Gainer and James Gainer. The complaint contained only the common counts, on an account, on an account stated, and for goods, wares and merchandise sold by the plaintiffs to the defendants at their request. On the trial, as shown by the bill of exceptions, the plaintiffs offered in evidence an itemized statement of account for goods sold by the…
1Opinion of the CourtWALIvEB, J.
It is only by force of the statute that, in suits upon accounts, an ex parte itemized statement of the account, not proved in one of the ordinary modes of proof, but only verified by affidavit, is made legal evidence, under certain conditions fixed by the statute. The statute prescribes as a condition to the competency of such evidence that the plaintiff', at the time of bringing his suit, indorse on the summons and complaint, or other original process, the fact that the account is verified by affidavit. — Code, § 2773. No such indorsement was made in the present case. The objection on this…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Alexander v. Moore & KornegaySupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
- Alvarez v. WarnerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
- Jordan v. Rice-Stix Dry Goods Co.Alabama Court of Appeals · 1947