Tullis v. Nachman & Meertief

• Decision Date: 09 February 1926
• Docket Number: 3 Div. 514
• Citation: 107 So. 224,21 Ala.App. 257
• Court: Alabama Court of Appeals
• Parties: TULLIS v. NACHMAN & MEERTIEF.

107 So. 224

21 Ala.App. 257

TULLIS v. NACHMAN & MEERTIEF.

3 Div. 514

Court of Appeals of Alabama

February 9, 1926

Appeal from Circuit Court, Montgomery County; Walter B. Jones Judge.

Action on account by Nachman & Meertief against Bettis H. Tullis and another. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant named appeals. Affirmed.

Rushton, Crenshaw & Rushton, of Montgomery, for appellant.

L.A Sanderson and T.B. Hill, Jr., both of Montgomery, for appellees.

BRICKEN P.J.

Appellees plaintiffs in the court below, brought their action in assumpsit against Mrs. Bettis H. Tullis, defendant in the court below (appellant here), and against Clayton Tullis Sr., the husband of Mrs. Bettis H. Tullis, to recover of them the sum of $227.77, alleged to be due plaintiffs by defendants, on account, together with the interest thereon accrued. Count 1 of the complaint claims said sum to be due on account; count 2 claims for merchandise, goods, and chattels sold; while count 3 claims for money had and received.

There was a discontinuance as to Clayton Tullis, Sr., and thereafter the cause proceeded to trial before the presiding judge of the court below without a jury. Judgment was pronounced in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendant Mrs. Bettis H. Tullis, for the sum of $240.97, on the 10th day of October, 1924, and on the 5th day of November, 1924, the defendant filed her motion for a new trial, which motion was overruled and denied by the trial court on the 8th day of November, 1924, and from the judgment of the trial court in favor of the plaintiff, and from the judgment of the trial court in overruling the motion for a new trial, this appeal is prosecuted.

It appears from the evidence that, prior to her marriage, the defendant bought goods on a credit from Nachman & Meertief the plaintiffs. After her marriage the defendant continued her purchases and, according to her own statement, she had all goods charged to Mrs. Clayton Tullis. During the long years of her business dealing with the plaintiffs monthly accounts were sent to her and these accounts were paid from time to time by checks signed by the defendant Mrs. Clayton Tullis. The articles composing the account were the usual and ordinary necessities for the defendant and her children. All articles were sold to Mrs. Clayton Tullis, or to her two daughters, and were charged upon the account run solely in the name of Mrs. Tullis, and all payments on the account were made by her. The articles were charged to her and the name of Clayton Tullis, Sr., nowhere appears upon the books of account, or sales ticket, nor is it claimed or pretended that,...