Legal Opinion

Bertrand v. Byrd

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided January 15, 1842PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Tins was an action of assumpsit, by Bertrand against Byrd, determined in Pulaski Circuit Court, in November, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. John J. Ceendenin, one of the Circuit Judges. The first count charged Byrd as acceptor of a bill, drawn on him' by William Mar-low, and accepted, payable “ in a settlement between himself and Bertrand,” without alleging that there had been any settlement.

Read the full summary

Tins was an action of assumpsit, by Bertrand against Byrd, determined in Pulaski Circuit Court, in November, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. John J. Ceendenin, one of the Circuit Judges. The first count charged Byrd as acceptor of a bill, drawn on him' by William Mar-low, and accepted, payable “ in a settlement between himself and Bertrand,” without alleging that there had been any settlement. The second was a good count on a note; the third a good indebitatus count; the fourth a count for goods sold, work and labor done, moneys-advanced, &c., to and for Byrd and two other persons; and the fifth…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court,

Dickinson, J.

The first count charges the defendant upon a bill of exchange. The acceptance was conditional; the defendant’s liability depended upon a settlement between himself and the plaintiff; and as that settlement is never averred to have taken place, of course his liability has not accrued. The demurrer was, therefore, properly sustained as to this count. The second count charges the defendant’s indebtedness upon a promissory note, and is every way formal and valid. The third is an indebitatus count, and equally as good. And the fourth is also an indebitatus count,…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Byrd v. BertrandSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1847

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

Powered by the Exa API