Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2 D.C. 56

Brockett v. Hammond

Decided July 15, 1812

Indebitatus assumpsit and quantum meruit for work and labor done, and materials furnished. The defendant proved a special agreement in writing, not under seal. The plaintiff offered to prove that he did the work, &c., exactly according to the agreement, and that the price stated in the general indebitatus assumpsit, was the contract price. objected that the plaintiff could not recover upon the general count.

Decided 1812-07-15

¶1But

the Court(ThRuston, J., absent,)

¶2overruled the objection.

¶3See 1 Chitty on Pleading, 340; Gordon v. Martin, Fitzgibbon, 302; Alcorn v. Westbrook, 1 Wilson, 117; Bul. N. P. 139; Giles v. Edwards, 7 T. R. 181; Mussen v. Price, 4 East, 147; Atty v. Parish, 1 New Rep. 104; Cooke v. Munstone, 1 New Rep. 351; Clarke v. Gray, 6 East, 569; Brooke v. White, 1 New Rep. 331; Bank of Columbia v. Patterson, February Term, 1813, Supreme Court of the United States, 7 Cranch, 299.

/2/dc/56 · .json · Public domain