Ballou v. Willey
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract, under St. 1890, c. 437, § 2, for payments alleged to have been made upon wagering contracts, with three counts, the first two following the language of the statute and the third on an account annexed setting forth the different payments, each count being for the amount of $18,929.27. Writ in the Supreme Judicial Court dated June 7,1901. The defendant demurred, alleging, among other grounds of demurrer, that the first two counts being under the statute and the third…
Read the full summary
Contract, under St. 1890, c. 437, § 2, for payments alleged to have been made upon wagering contracts, with three counts, the first two following the language of the statute and the third on an account annexed setting forth the different payments, each count being for the amount of $18,929.27. Writ in the Supreme Judicial Court dated June 7,1901. The defendant demurred, alleging, among other grounds of demurrer, that the first two counts being under the statute and the third at common law could not be joined, and that the declaration did not contain any description of the securities and…
1Opinion of the CourtBarker, J.
1. The demurrer to the declaration was rightly overruled. The counts which cite the statute and that on an account annexed each sound in contract and therefore may be joined. Pub. Sts. c. 167, § 2, cl. 5. The first and second counts follow the statute and state the substantive facts necessary to a recovery under St. 1890, c. 437, § 2. To set out the circum*568stances from which those facts might be deduced was unnecessary and would have been bad pleading. Woodbury v. Jones, 3 Gray, 261. Willard v. Williams, 7 Gray, 184. See Taunton v. Caswell, 4 Pick. 275; Coolidge v. Learned, 8 Pick. 504, 511.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Smith v. First National BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Holmes v. HuntMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
3Cited by2 opinions
- Rosenblum v. GinisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
- Marks v. Metropolitan Stock ExchangeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902