Riker v. Jacobus
Riker v. Jacobus
Opinion of the Court
— -This is an action on the case. It appears from the justice’s return, that a difference arose between the parties concerning certain damages said to be done by the defendant to the plaintiff’s meadows; that this difference was submitted to arbitrators, and that the arbitrators awarded to the plaintiff the sum of $25; that the
There are several causes assigned for the reversal of the judgment; perhaps more than one of them may contain something of substance. I shall take notice of the second only, viz.: that this ought to have been an action of debt, and not an action on the case. At common [*] law, it would have been well enough in its present form; but by the act of Assembly, in that respect, the remedy is changed. It is a simple contract for the payment of money. It ought to have been an action of debt. Therefore, I am of opinion, there must be a reversal.
— An action on the case cannot be sustained on this state of demand, according to our act of Assembly. The justice should have allowed the motion of the defendant below for a nonsuit; on that ground he concurred in a reversal.
Pennington, J. — Concurred.
Judgment reversed.
Cited in Sayres v. Inhab. of Springfield, 3 Halst. 166.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- RIKER against JACOBUS
- Status
- Published