Merriman Co v. Thomas & Co
Decision Date | 15 September 1904 |
Citation | 103 Va. 24,48 S.E. 490 |
Court | Virginia Supreme Court |
Parties | MERRIMAN CO. v. THOMAS & CO. |
ASSUMPSIT — DECLARATION — AFFIDAVIT—REQUISITES—VERIFICATION BY BOOKKEEPER—INTEREST.
1. Code 1887, § 3286, provides that when, in
assumpsit, an affidavit is filed with the declaration, stating that the amount claimed is justly due, etc., a plea in bar shall not be received unless verified, in the absence of which judgment shall be for plaintiff. Held, that an affidavit by plaintiff's bookkeeper, filed with the declaration, was insufficient to authorize judgment in favor of plaintiff.
2. Under Code 1887, § 3286, providing that in an action of assumpsit on a contract for the payment of money, if plaintiff file with his declaration an affidavit stating the amount of his claim, that such amount is justly due, and the time from which plaintiff claims interest, a plea in bar unaccompanied by affidavit shall not be received, an affidavit failing to state "the time from which plaintiff claimed interest" was defective.
Error to Circuit Court, Giles County.
Action by Thomas & Co. against the Merriman Company on an account. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant brings error. Reversed.
Martin Williams and S. W. Williams, for plaintiff in error.
Jas. J. Johnston, for defendant in error.
KEITH, P. Thomas & Co. instituted their action in assumpsit in the circuit court of Giles county against the Merriman Company to recover $338.03. An itemized account was filed, accompanied by an affidavit in the following terms: "State of Virginia, City of Roanoke, to-wit:
The defendant appeared by counsel, and tendered its plea in writing of nonassumpsit, to the filing of which plea the plaintiff objected, because it was not verified by affidavit. The court sustained the objection, and refused to permit the plea to be filed, and entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff, to which action of the court the defendant excepted, and the case is before us upon a writ of error.
Section 3286 of the Code of 1887 is as follows:
If the affidavit which accompanied the declaration and account conforms to the provisions of the section just quoted, then the circuit court properly rejected the plea offered by defendant, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Mills v. Furner
...it was held that an affidavit was defective for failing to state the time from which plaintiff demanded interest. Merri-man Co. v. Thomas & Co., 103 Va. 24, 48 S. E. 490. Plaintiff's affidavit in this case, we think, was fatally defective, and was properly quashed. The next ground relied on......
-
Kingman Mills v. Furner
...it was held that an affidavit was defective for failing to state the time from which plaintiff demanded interest. Merriman Co. v. Thomas & Co., 103 Va. 24, 48 S.E. 490. Plaintiff's in this case, we think, was fatally defective, and was properly quashed. The next ground relied on for reversa......
-
State ex rel. Key v. Bond
... ... to be his representative character and his derivative ... authority." 1 Mechem, Agency, § 26; Merriman Co. v ... Thomas & Co., 103 Va. 26, 48 S.E. 490 ... Again, ... in pointing out the difference between an agent and a ... ...
-
Columbia Auto Works, Inc. v. Yates
...the making and filing as well as the verification of notice of lien in suit. The affidavit considered in the case of Merriman Co. v. Thomas & Co., 103 Va. 24, 48 S.E. 490, was one which, if it had conformed to section 3286 of the Code of 1887, when filed in assumpsit with the declaration st......