Legal Opinion

Britzell v. Fryberger

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1850PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THIS was an action of assumpsit brought by the plaintiffs in error. Two counts; one special, the other for money had and received. Special plea in bar to the *177whole declaration, averring that the demand in the second count is the same with that specified in the first. Demurrer to the plea, and judgment for the defendant. Held, that the first count is bad, as it shows that the consideration for the promise moved from a stranger. Farlow v. Kemp, 7 Blackf. 544. The plaintiff, by demurring to the plea, which avers the cause of action in the second count to be the same with that specified in the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Farlow v. KempIndiana Supreme Court · 1845
  2. M'Gillicuddy v. ForsytheIndiana Supreme Court · 1840

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Miller v. BillingslyIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
  2. Bird v. LaniusIndiana Supreme Court · 1856
  3. Hendricks v. FrankIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
  4. Reddick v. KeeslingIndiana Supreme Court · 1891
  5. Carson v. SpiegelIndiana Court of Appeals · 1931

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API