Case ID: va_19/html/0323-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "JUDGE ROANE", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Moseley v. Jones.
    Argued January 29th, 1816.
    i. Assumpsit — Written Agreement — Declaration-Consideration.  — In the action of assumpsit, if no consideration for promise he laid in the declaration, judgment ought to he arrested! notwithstanding it he founded on a written agreement. +**See Hall v. Smith, Young & Hyde, 3 Munf. 550.
    The appellee "William Jones, jr. brought an action of assumpsit against Arthur Moseley trustee for A. Jones, on a written agreement, dated the 13th of October, 1807, “by which the defendant promised to return to the plaintiff", on or before the 1st of January 1811, 55% barrels of corn, with interest, also to pay him the sum of 111. 8s. 7d. with interest from the 14th of January 1806, on or before the 1st day of January 1811.” No consideration for the promise was set forth in the declaration. The defendant pleaded non assumpsit, and, (after the verdict for the plaintiff for 651. 8s. 7d. damages,) moved in-arrest of judgment, on the ground that the declaration was defective in not stating a sufficient consideration and promise ; which motion being overruled by the court, and judgment rendered according to the verdict, he appealed to this court.
    The case was submitted by the appellant’s counsel; no counsel appearing for the appel-
    
      
       See monographic note on “Assumpsit” appended to Kennaird v. Jones, 9 Gratt. 183. The principal case is cited with approval "by Parker, J., in Jackson v. Jackson, 10 Leigh 451.
    
    
      
       Promise to Pay Debt of Another — Consideration.— The promise of one person to pay the debt of another, though in writing, must he hounded on a consideration to make it binding. Winkler v. C. & O. R. Co., 12 W. Va. 707, citing principal case.
      The principal case is also cited in Farmers’ Bank v. Clarke, 4 Leigh 610.
    
   January 29th, 1816,

JUDGE ROANE

pronounced the court’s opinion that the judgment was erroneous, there being no consideration laid in the declaration.

Judgment reversed, and entered that the appellee take nothing, &c.