Case ID: how-pr_2/html/0079-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Brojstsoh, Chief Justice.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William P. Swift et al. agt. David L. Wells.
    One bill of goods, containing fifty different items, delivered at one time, is in fact but one item; and a motion for a reference upon sucha bill, as containing a long account, will be denied.
    
      February Term, 1846.
    Motion by defendant for a reference.
    It appeared from defendant’s papers that the declaration in this cause contained seven counts in assumpsit; the pleas were the general issue with notice of set-off and plea of payment. The cause was once tried at the circuit, and verdict rendered for the plaintiffs; a new trial was subsequently ordered by this court, and the cause was again noticed for trial. The plaintiffs’ bill of particulars contained a list of fifty items; and the defendant’s bill of particulars seven items; that it required the examination of a long account on the part of the plaintiffs, at the former circuit, and would again require the examination of a long account on the part of the plaintiff on the trial.
    It appeared from plaintiffs’ papers, that the only demand which plaintiffs claimed in this cause was, the balance due on a bill of goods which had previously been sold to defendants; the goods were all sold at one time, and made but one bill; and the gross amount of the bill was agreed upon at the time of sale; the defendant had no set-off of any kind, and the only question raised was, as to payment.
    H. H. Martin, defendants counsel.
    
    Hunt & Walradt, defendants attorneys.
    
    C. P. Kirkland, plaintiffs' counsel.
    
    Dalliba & Clark, plaintiffs' attorneys.
    
   Brojstsoh, Chief Justice.

Denied the motion, on the ground that one bill of goods, containing fifty different items, delivered at the same time, was in fact but one item.