Stiel & Co. v. Ide & Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Third Division; G. W. Hendricks, Judge; ■ 1. The complaint practically is barren of allegations required (by law. 3 Ark. 389, 592. Allegation of demand was necessary; its absence ground of demurrer. 3 Ark. 592; Newman PI. & Pr. (1871) 367. The demurrer should have been sustained. 1. The appeal should be dismissed and judgment entered here. The demurrer was properly overruled, as was the motion to set aside the judgment.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Third Division; G. W. Hendricks, Judge; ■ 1. The complaint practically is barren of allegations required (by law. 3 Ark. 389, 592. Allegation of demand was necessary; its absence ground of demurrer. 3 Ark. 592; Newman PI. & Pr. (1871) 367. The demurrer should have been sustained. 1. The appeal should be dismissed and judgment entered here. The demurrer was properly overruled, as was the motion to set aside the judgment. Kirby’s Dig., § 3151; 46 Ark. 498; 95 Id. 403. 2. Demand is not necessary before suit on an account. 8 Ark. 147; 13 Id. 69. Failure to…
1Opinion of the Court
Hart, J.,
Ike Stiel Co. prosecutes this appeal to reverse a judgment on account.
This suit was instituted in the circuit court by Geo, P. Ide Co. against Ike Stiel Co. The complaint, omitting the caption, is as follows:
Plaintiff states that the defendant is indebted to them on account in the sum of three hundred and twenty-seven dollars and eighty-eight cents. An itemized verified account of said indebtedness is filed herewith and made part of this complaint.
Wherefore plaintiff prays judgment in the sum of $327.88 and for interest and ooists and all proper relief.
Attached to the ¡complaint was…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Arkansas Life Insurance v. American National InsuranceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
- Hershy v. MacGreevy & YantisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1885
3Cited by1 opinion
- Dengler v. DenglerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1938