Allen v. Bobo
Allen v. Bobo
Opinion of the Court
delivered-the opinion of the court.
By agreement of counsel on file it is shown that the original declaration of appellants was filed in 1883. This was destroyed by fire in 1887, but a substitute for it was filed in 1890. It is to be noted that this is alone for “$700 for money advanced to and laid out and expended for the use of said defendant by said plaintiffs at his special instance and request,” and that no bill of particulars appears. In 1892 appellants filed their amended declaration, the first count of which was for $700 “for goods, wares, and merchandise sold and delivered,” etc., and the second count was for $700 upon an account stated. The bill of particulars is : “ January 31st, 1881. Wortham & Co., $700.” There is no reference to any draft in either of these declarations. On October 20, 1894, appellants filed an amendment to their amended declaration,
“$700. Friar’s Point, Miss., January 3d, 1881. At sight, pay to the order of J. J. Prince seven hundred dollars, at-, value received, and charge the same to account of
Chas.'L. Wortham & Co.
“To Allen, West & Bush, New Orleans, La.”
Indorsed: “Alcorn, Wortham & Co.” “Pay Jones & Prince, or order. J. J. Prince.” “Pay J. T. Fargason & Co. Jones & Prince.” “J. T. Fargason & Co.”
The defenses of Bobo are nil debet, non assumpsit, the three years’ and the six years’ statutes of limitation, and payment on full settlement with Wortham & Co. The evidence on behalf of plaintiffs — none being presented for defendant — shows that the charge of this draft to Bobo is the only instance where his name ever appeared on the books of Allen, West & Bush. It shows that when Wortham & Co. gave the draft they sent Allen, West & Bush this telegram: “Pay Prince draft. Charge same to R. E. Bobo. Also Fisher draft. Do not take up any other paper,” — and they paid and so charged it. It shows that Allen, West & Bush never had any dealings with
Affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Allen, West & Bush v. Robert E. Bobo
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Monet Paid. Evidence. Sufficiency. Consideration. Peremptory instruction. Where plaintiffs, by direction of the drawer, charged defendant with money paid on a draft, they cannot recover thereon in the absence of evidence that defendant authorized the charge, and a peremptory instruction in his favor was proper, although a witness testified that defendant promised plaintiffs to pay the money as soon as he was able, there being nothing to show a consideration for the promise.