Jordan v. Siefert
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract-upon an account annexed. Answer, judgment in another action for the same cause between the same parties. At the trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, the defendant introduced the record of the judgment, which showed the following: 1st. A writ sued out by this plaintiff against this defendant, described to be administratrix of the estate of Charles A. Siefert, not stating the class of action to which it belonged, and containing a declaration precisely similar…
Read the full summary
Contract-upon an account annexed. Answer, judgment in another action for the same cause between the same parties. At the trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, the defendant introduced the record of the judgment, which showed the following: 1st. A writ sued out by this plaintiff against this defendant, described to be administratrix of the estate of Charles A. Siefert, not stating the class of action to which it belonged, and containing a declaration precisely similar to that in the present action. 2d. A plea in abatement, that the writ did not state whether it was brought in contract,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The judgment in the other action must be taken to have been rendered on the plea in abatement. The record shows that no issue on the merits was joined or tried. That judgment, therefore, is no bar to this action. Wilbur v. Gilmore, 21 Pick. 250.
Exceptions sustained
2Cited by5 opinions
- McKinney v. CurtissMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Kelly v. Town of MilanUnited States Circuit Court · 1884
- Young v. Providence & Stonington Steamship Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
- Butchers' Slaughtering & Melting Ass'n v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1884
- Brakefield v. LucasSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1901