Maury v. Olive

2 Stew. 472
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided January 15, 1830·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

By JUDGE PERRY.

The qifestion presented for the consideration of this Court, is, does the declaration shew a good cause of action? We are of opinion it does not, because the plaintiffhas not shewn in what respect the defendant is indebted, and although it would not be necessary in a declaration to state the particular work done, or goods sold; yet it should appear that it was not a debt of record, or specialty, but only a simple contract, and any general words by which that would appear, would be sufficient. The plaintiff, therefore, not having stated in his declaration, the consideration out of which the indebtedness of the defendant grew, the demurrer was properly susta.ined.

Footnotes

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

Maury v. Olive, 2 Stew. 472 (Ala. 1830).

2 Stew. 472 (Maury v. Olive) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Malone-Beal Mer. Co. v. Greer
53 So. 810 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1910)
Newton v. Brook
134 Ala. 269 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1901)
Kean v. Mitchell
13 Mich. 207 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1865)