Rowell v. Giles
Opinion of the Court
The complaint seems to have been framed upon the theory that, under the contract between the parties, the defendants had become absolutely liable for a specified amount, payable, by installments,'at specified periods, before the modification of such contract by adding to such amount
There is no averment in the complaint that, under the original contract, the plaintiffs promised or agreed that the defendants’ advertisement should be actually published in the newspapers specified, nor is it alleged that such publication has been made. The action is not brought, therefore, to recover for work, &c., done and performed, or procured to be done and performed, at an agreed price; and proof of such performance would, under the pleadings, be neither requisite or competent. No such cause of action is alleged. The plaintiffs must recover, if at all, upon an account stated, and the only proof necessary or proper in support of it must relate simply to and must establish the liquidation and settlement of the amount of defendants’ liability at the date when such statement and settlement are claimed to have been made. With respect to the items which entered into such account, thus alleged to have been stated and settled, there is no controversy before the court. The case does not require the
I am-of opinion that the case is substantially the same as it would have been had promissory notes been given for the several installments; and had the suit been instituted upon such promissory notes, in such casé a reference.would have been unauthorized. If the account was, in fact, stated and settled, as alleged, there is no more occasion to examine it than there would be if notes had been given for the amount found to be due.
The motion is denied, with ten dollars costs.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.