Dobbins v. Thomas
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Hearing on an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of tbe Supreme Court of the District of Columbia entered under the 73d rule of that court for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The Court in the opinion stated the case as follows: This is an appeal from a judgment entered in. an action of assumpsit under the 73 d rule of the supreme court of the District of Columbia.
Read the full summary
Hearing on an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of tbe Supreme Court of the District of Columbia entered under the 73d rule of that court for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The Court in the opinion stated the case as follows: This is an appeal from a judgment entered in. an action of assumpsit under the 73 d rule of the supreme court of the District of Columbia. The declaration of the plaintiff, Frank H. Thomas, in the general common counts, claimed of the defendant, Mary A. Dobbins, a married woman, the sum of $296.83. The bill of particulars accompanying the declaration…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Shepard
1. It is questionable if the plaintiff’s supporting affidavit was itself sufficient to entitle him to the judgment entered. The declaration does not set out a contract of sale and express promise to pay the prices claimed for the articles in the bill of particulars, but consists of the ordinary common counts for goods sold and received, etc. The affidavit, on the other hand, sets up a specific contract of sale at agreed prices, and does not attempt to support the common counts. This question was not raised on the trial, and we nee'd not decide it, because the judgment must be reversed on…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Stein v. Woodward & LothropDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1950