Chamberlin v. Perkins
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit. March 19, 1870, Philo Chamberlin, James M. Cham-berlin, and Oren C. Lee, described as partners under the firm of J. M. Chamberlain & Co., sued out a writ against the defendant, returnable to the April term, 1870, of the supreme court for this county.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. March 19, 1870, Philo Chamberlin, James M. Cham-berlin, and Oren C. Lee, described as partners under the firm of J. M. Chamberlain & Co., sued out a writ against the defendant, returnable to the April term, 1870, of the supreme court for this county. The declaration contained the common counts for goods, wares, and merchandise sold and delivered, money had and received, &c., and an account annexed for flour and corn sold, and interest due, amounting to $1,210.09. The defendant claimed that he had paid for the corn and flour by drafts drawn by the plaintiffs on him, and accepted by…
1Opinion of the Court
Amendments — Rescission of Contracts. Under the count for money had and received in the first suit, the drafts set forth in the amended specification were clearly admissible in evidence, the signatures being first proved. The question of filing or amending a specification is ordinarily one of discretion, to be exercised by the judge who tries the case. The office of a specification is to apprise the defendant of the nature of the plaintiff's claim where the counts in the declaration are general. The defendant called for no specification, and the plaintiffs might therefore have offered the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pickering v. DeRochemontSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1863
- Rollins v. HornSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1860
3Cited by1 opinion
- Dow v. HarkinSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1892