Jaudon v. Fidelity Bank & Trust Co.

87 So. 313, 81 Fla. 115
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided February 3, 1921·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In an action to recover damages for the non-payment of a check drawn on it, the declaration in one count alleges “that the said Fidelity & Trust Company upon the presentation of said check accepted the same,” while the other count alleged- a promise to pay checks drawn as alleged, and the other allegations are not repugnant to and do not neutralize the stated allegations.

The hill of particulars if properly made a part of the declaration does not negative the allegations of the declaration.

A demurrer to the declaration was sustained, and plaintiffs refusing to further plead, a final judgment on the demurrer was rendered for the defendant, and plaintiffs took writ of error.

The declaration even considered with the bill of particulars states a cause of action and was not subject to the demurrer interposed, therefore the judgment is reversed.

Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Whitfield, Ellis and West, J. J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Jaudon v. Fidelity Bank & Trust Co., 87 So. 313, 81 Fla. 115 (Fla. 1921).

87 So. 313 (Jaudon v. Fidelity Bank & Trust Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Foster v. St. Johns Electric Co.
98 So. 75 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1923)
Boone v. Gay
94 So. 501 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1922)