Pleadings, Parties and Forms Under the Code; Adapted to the Statutes of Ohio in Force July, 1881, with Full Authorities from All States Using a Code and Decisions from the Common Law Practice Volume 2

Pleadings, Parties and Forms Under the Code; Adapted to the Statutes of Ohio in Force July, 1881, with Full Authorities from All States Using a Code and Decisions from the Common Law Practice Volume 2

By (author) 

List price: US$22.39

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1882 edition. Excerpt: ...the rendition of services sued for in a. certain capacity, is not a denial that defendant had employed plaintiff in that capacity. Ryan v. Mayorof New York, 42 N. Y. Superior Ct. 202; also in 3 Abb. N. Gas. 157. ' A complaint nverring services performed at defendant's request, of i the value of $3,000, of which a bill of particulars was demanded and furnished, an answer admitting the performance of the work as alleged, but denying they were of the value specified, only puts in issue the value. Van Dylce v. Maguire, 57 N. Y. 429. 3. Justification for discharge.--The master, sued on a contract by the servant, if he discharged him for improper conduct, should slate what the impropriety was; if for failure to do the work, he should state in what particular'. Sugg v.Blow,17 Mo. 359. See 19 Mo. 86, 132. 4. Unskillfulness is no defense to an action for day wages. Clark v. Fensicy, 3 Kan. 389. 5. The statute of frauds is no defense after the contract has been executed by plaintiff. Tea-slay v. Moore, 30 O. S. 18-1. Otherwise, it may be. Abbott v. Ins/rip, 29 O. S. 59. SHERIFF. x. Judgment void.--A denial of tho recovery of the judgment alleged in the petition in an action as for failing to levy will sustain proof that the judgment was void for want of service of summons. Newburg v. Munshower, 29 O. S. 617. 2. Excuse for delay.-An answer by a. sherifl' sued for damages caused by not levying execution within a reasonable time, averring that his failurc to execute the process was without fault, omission, or negligence on his part, states a legal conclusion, and is bad on demurrer. Stating that he put the writ on file for service in tho regular order, but, by reason of his ofiicial duties, before he reached it or was able to...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 244 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 13mm | 440g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 123686977X
  • 9781236869777