Legal Opinion

Fowlis v. Heinecke

Montana Supreme Court

Decided March 12, 1930No. 6,574PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Angstman

Complaint was filed in this action on October 2, 1925, on open account. On October 8, 1925, answers were filed by defendants, and a demand was made upon plaintiff to furnish an itemized statement of the account. The plaintiff did not furnish such statement, but filed a reply on April 1, 1926. The case was set for trial on February 24, 1927. On February 15, 1927, plaintiff made application to amend the complaint. This motion was granted, and the amended complaint was filed August 31, 1927. A second amended complaint was filed on January 9, 1928, based upon an account stated. Whether the first…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Buhler v. LoftusMontana Supreme Court · 1917
  2. Cullen v. Western Mortgage & Warranty Title Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1913
  3. Roy v. King's EstateMontana Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Martin v. HeinzeMontana Supreme Court · 1904
  5. Union Lumber Co. v. J. W. Schouten & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1914

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Pritchard Petroleum Co. v. Farmers Co-Op. Oil & Supply Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1948
  2. State Ex Rel. Paramount Publix Corp. v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1931
  3. State Ex Rel. Gold Creek Mining Co. v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1935
  4. State Ex Rel. Paramount Publix Corp. v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1931

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

Powered by the Exa API