(No. 36.) For money had and received to plaintiff's use. Title of the Cause. The plaintiff complains of the defendant: and the day of the defendant, being the agent of the plaintiff in, [stating generally the employment,] collected and received from divers persons certain sums of money, for and on account of the plaintiff, amounting in the whole to the sum of $, no part of which has been paid by defendant to the plaintiff, although payment thereof has been demanded. Wherefore the plaintiff demands judgment against the defendant, for, &c. (No. 37.) For money paid, laid out and expended for the use of the defendant. Title of the Cause. The plaintiff complains of the defendant: That on or about the day of he paid one J. S., for and on account of a debt contracted with said J. S. by the defendant, and at the defendant's request,' the sum of 1 The fact of a request should be alleged whenever it can be proved. So also in regard to a promise on the part of defendant to pay, &c. It is proper to allege that the defendant promised, when such is the fact to be proved. But if the request or promise be a mere implication of law, arising from other facts, it is neither necessary nor proper to state it. The facts only, which raise the legal inference, should be alleged. (Pleadings, 263-265; see. also, Scovel v. The American Mineral Co., 11 How., 24.) $ 9 no part of which sum has been repaid by the said defendant to the plaintiff, although payment thereof has been demanded. Wherefore the plaintiff demands judgment of the defendant, for, &c. (No. 38.) For several items of work, materials furnished and money. Title of the Cause. The plaintiff complains of the defendant: That on the day of the defendant was indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of $ for the work and services of the plaintiff in the defendant's business, as, [stating it generally,] done and performed for defendant between the and the day of, which were reasonably worth $-. day of Also, for materials, to wit: [Stating what kind,] furnished, during said period, by plaintiff to the defendant, in and about said work, and which were worth $-. Also, for the sum of $, paid and expended by plaintiff for defendant, on the one J. S., for, [stating for what,] amounting in all to the said sum of $, which is still due from the defendant to the plaintiff, and no part thereof paid.1 day .of to Wherefore the plaintiff demands judgment against the defendant, &c. In an action to recover many items of demand, claimed by one and the same right, the items may be, for the sake of brevity and convenience, thrown into one count (cause of action). (Longworthy v. Knapp, 4 Abbott, 115; Adams v. Holley, administrator, 12 How., 326.) (No. 39.) For a general balance of an account. Title of the Cause. $ The plaintiff complains of the defendant: That the defendant is indebted to him in the sum of for the balance of an account between plaintiff day of that is to say, and defendant, commencing on the and ending on the - day of various items of goods, consisting mainly of groceries, sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant between the dates aforesaid; for personal service and labor, at various times between the dates aforesaid, rendered by the plaintiff to defendant as an accountant or book-keeper; for commissions of plaintiff on the sale for defendant of various articles of farm produce between the dates aforesaid; and for moneys paid by plaintiff for defendant, on account for storage, freight and transportation of said produce, between the dates aforesaid;1 the whole value of which several items and aggregate of said account is the sum of $- on which the defendant has paid the sum of $, leaving due the said sum first abovementioned. Wherefore the plaintiff demands judgment against the defendant, for, &c. 1 See, ante, note, on p. 430, as to pleading several items in one count, or statement of a cause of action; see, also, Pleadings, 333, 334. (No. 40.) For use and occupation, no price agreed on. Title of the Cause. The plaintiff complains of the defendant : That the defendant is indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of $ for the use and occupation, by the defendant, of the plaintiff's premises, situate, [describing them generally,] for the period of months, from the day of That the defendant has occupied the said premises for said period, as plaintiff's tenant, and has not paid the rent (which is of the value of $, for said period), or any part thereof. Wherefore the plaintiff demands judgment against the defendant, for, &c. (No. 41.) For use and occupation under a lease.1 SUPREME COURT-COUNTY OF COLUMBIA. Robert S. Livingston agt. George L. Finkle. The complaint of the abovenamed plaintiff respectfully shows to this court, that on the 11th day of June, 1845, 1 In an action for rent due, where there is a lease under seal, the plaintiff may elect to sue on the covenant, and thereby make the covenant his cause of action; or sue for the debt (rent) and by so the plaintiff leased to the defendant the farm then occupied by the defendant, situate in the town of Taghkanick, in the county of Columbia, with a suitable wood lot or privilege to get rails in the commons of the plaintiff, for the term of ten years from the 1st day of January, then next, at the yearly rent of $150, payable at the expiration of each year; and the said plaintiff avers, that the defendant thereupon, on the said 1st day of January, 1846, entered into, and has ever since used and occupied, said premises so leased to him as aforesaid; and that on the 1st day of January, 1851, there was due and now remains unpaid of the rent, agreed to be paid by the said defendant, for the years 1848, 1849 and 1850, the principal sum of $450. Wherefore the plaintiff claims judgment for the sum of $450, with interest on the sum of $150 from the 1st of January, 1849, and on the sum of $150 from the 1st of January, 1850, and on the sum of $150 from the 1st of January, 1851, besides costs. R. B. MONELL, Plaintiff's Attorney. doing make the subsequent occupation his cause of action. And in the latter case the lease under seal may be given in evidence to establish the relation of landlord and tenant, and to show the amount of the debt, even where the lease is not set out or referred to in the complaint. (Ten Eyck v. Houghtaling, 12 How., 523.) 55 |