Maupin v. Francis
This text of 16 F. Cas. 1168 (Maupin v. Francis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
But
said that when a contract has been executed, indebitatus assumpsit will lie for the amount due upon it.
There was a plea in bar that at the time of commencing this suit, there was another suit depending between the same parties for the same cause of action. The evidence to support this issue, was of a suit by Catharine Frisset alone, who was one of the present plaintiffs, for the same cause of action; which was discontinued after the present suit was brought.
The Court instructed the jury that it was not such a suit between the same parties as would support the issue on the part of the defendant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
16 F. Cas. 1168, 2 D.C. 38, 2 Cranch 38, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maupin-v-francis-circtddc-1811.