Roberts v. Leak
Supreme Court of Georgia
Exceptions to auditor’s report. Before Judge Reid. City court of Atlanta. September 13, 1898.
1Opinion of the CourtCobb, J.
1. Where an action is brought on an account, a recovery may be had by proving a special contract, if the terms of the contract can be gathered from the bill of particulars. Roberts v. Harris, 32 Ga. 542; Johnson v. Quin, 51 Ga. 289; Johnson v. Quin, 52 Ga. 485; Schmidt v. Wambacker, 62 Ga. 321. The bill of particulars in the present case was substantially as above indicated.
2. The averments in the original petition and the statements in the bill of particulars attached thereto, taken together, showing that the purpose of the pleader was to bring a suit for an accounting between the parties as…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Johnson v. QuinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1874
- Schmidt v. WambackerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1879
- Craven v. WalkerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
- Johnson v. QuinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1874
- Roberts & Hughey v. HarrisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1861
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Kelly v. Strouse & Bros.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Lawson v. Williamson Coal & Coke Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1907
- Joyce-Pruit Co. v. MeadowsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1921
- Haynes v. Louisiana Ry. & Nav. Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1917
- Ittner Bros. v. Farmers State BankCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1914
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.