Brooks v. Scott's
Supreme Court of Virginia
IN an action of assumpsit by Hezekiah Brooks against fames Scott, in the county court of Prince Edward, the declaration contained four counts, viz. 1 st. A general indebitatus assumpsit for good.s sold and delivered; 2d. A like count for money lent; 3d. A like count for services done _ , . , . n . . , and performed in tne capacity ot an overseer; and, 4th. A common quantum meruit for like services.
Read the full summary
IN an action of assumpsit by Hezekiah Brooks against fames Scott, in the county court of Prince Edward, the declaration contained four counts, viz. 1 st. A general indebitatus assumpsit for good.s sold and delivered; 2d. A like count for money lent; 3d. A like count for services done _ , . , . n . . , and performed in tne capacity ot an overseer; and, 4th. A common quantum meruit for like services. At the trial, on the general issue, the plaintiff offered evidence to Prove that the defendant had acknowledged he had employed the plaintiff as an overseer for the term of r J ... . . three years,…
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Cábele.
(After stating the case.) The only question now to be decided is, whether the evidence was properly admitted, under either count in the declaration. The two first counts, being for goods sold and money lent, are so totally variant from the evidence as to be thrown entirely out of view. Nor do I think the evidence admissible under the Sd count. It is true that, with respect to debts for work and labour, or other personal services, the rule is, that, however special the agreement was, yet if it was not under seal, and the terms of it have been performed on the plaintiff’s part, and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Oregon Railway & Navigation Co. v. DacresWashington Supreme Court · 1890
- Wilkie v. ChandonWashington Supreme Court · 1890