Case ID: nc_2/html/0559-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per curiam\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Anonymous.
    This was a special case, in which it was referred to the court to decide, whether or not an action on the case upon assumpsit, would lie for the use and occupation of , a house. The declaration stated the use and occupation, and a promise t.o pay. Mr. Hay cited 2 Cro. 596, 668, 684. Cro. El. 118, 859. Cro. C.414.
   Per curiam

An express promise,' by all the books, will support this action — some of them say, an implied promise will nor, because debt for rent is the assigned action — the promise here stated, may be taken to have been an express one, as the contrary is not stated in the special case. The Plaintiff had judgment.

Judgments have been given for the Plaintiffs upon a quantum meruit, before the H. Geo. 2, c. 19. Vide 3 Mo. 73.

Note. — Vide Hayes v. Acre, Con. Rep. 19.