1 D.C. 418
District of Columbia District Court
Decided July 15, 1807
District of Columbia District Court · decided 1807-07-15
<p>Parol evidence cannot be given of the contents of a letter mitten by the defendant to a stranger to the suit.</p> <p>A bill of parcels, receipted by the defendant, is not, per se, evidence of an unexecuted contract to deliver the goods, but is prima facie evidence of a contract executed.</p> <p>An action for money had and received, will lie for money paid by the plaintiff to the defendant, upon a contract which the defendant has failed to execute on his part.</p>
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently August 1943
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1807-07-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1refused to hear Mr. Swann in reply, and said the. point had been often decided, that if a contract be not complied with on one part, and the other party had paid his money, he may disaffirm the contract, and recover back his money in an action for money had and received.
¶2Verdict for the plaintiff.
¶3The defendant took a bill of exceptions, but did not bring a writ of error.