Case ID: fla_81/html/0115-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

P. B. Jaudon and J. F. Jaudon, as Jaudon Brothers, Plaintiffs in Error v. Fidelity Bank & Trust Company, a Corporation, Defendant in Error.
    
    Opinion Filed February 3, 1921.
    Where a declaration in two counts sufficiently alleges an acceptance of a cheek, and a promise to pay checks drawn as alleged, to state a cause of action, it is error to sustain a demurrer to the declaration.
    A Writ of Error to the Circuit Court for Dade County; H. Pierre Branning, Judge.
    
      Judgment reversed.
    
      Taylor & Taylor and J. C. McClure, for Plaintiffs in Error;
    
      Gramling & Clarkson, for Defendant' in Error.
   Per Curiam.

In an action to recover damages for the non-payment of a check drawn on it, the declaration in one count alleges “that the said Fidelity & Trust Company upon the presentation of said check accepted the same,” while the other count alleged- a promise to pay checks drawn as alleged, and the other allegations are not repugnant to and do not neutralize the stated allegations.

The hill of particulars if properly made a part of the declaration does not negative the allegations of the declaration.

A demurrer to the declaration was sustained, and plaintiffs refusing to further plead, a final judgment on the demurrer was rendered for the defendant, and plaintiffs took writ of error.

The declaration even considered with the bill of particulars states a cause of action and was not subject to the demurrer interposed, therefore the judgment is reversed.

Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Whitfield, Ellis and West, J. J., concur.