Dunn v. Record
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions and motion for a new trial by the defendant. Assumpsit. The exceptions were to the allowance of an amendment. The writ originally contained a count upon an account annexed, and a general money count.
Read the full summary
On exceptions and motion for a new trial by the defendant. Assumpsit. The exceptions were to the allowance of an amendment. The writ originally contained a count upon an account annexed, and a general money count. The former consisted of a single item for cash received upon a judgment in favor of Mr. Dunn against the Grand Trunk Railway Company recovered at the April term, 1869, of the superior court, and interest thereon, $2,377.66; this was stricken out and a new account annexed, setting out this judgment more particularly, stating the debt, costs and interest separately, the aggregate…
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, J.
The amendment was allowable. It is argued that the amended count is upon a judgment. It is not. It is a count for money due to the plaintiff on account, and a judgment is merely referred to as the source from which the money sued for was derived.
The first question under the motion is, whether the assignment from the plaintiff to the defendant was valid or not. The plantiff denies that it was valid, because such a kind of claim is not legally assignable. McGlinchy v. Hall, 58 Maine, 152. The defendant contends that the assignment, as between the parties, would be effectual, after the money was…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Williams v. BaileySupreme Court of Florida · 1915
- Thweatt v. FreemanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Anderson v. ElliottSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1989
- Egan v. BurnightSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1914
- Peaslee v. Pedco, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1978
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.