Holmes v. J. O. Frost's Sons

Citations

• 125 Pa. 328
• 17 A. 424
• 1889 Pa. LEXIS 720

Syllabus

<p>(a) A employed B to carry on a business for him. On the determination thereof, B gave A a bond conditioned upon his delivering to A the books and accounts, arid paying to him “ any balance that shall appear due to said A, after an examination of the books and accounts, and an inventory of the stock in said store; the said examination to be concluded within two months from this date; the said B shall render all needful instructions and information in the proper settlement of said business and accounts.”</p> <p>(b) In a suit on this bond against B, and C, the surety on the bond, a voluntary nonsuit was suffered upon the suggestion of the court that the bond contemplated an examination of the accounts by both parties and something ascertained between them. An action of account render was then instituted by A against B alone, and a judgment for $1,207.29 rendered therein. Subsequently this action of covenant was brought on the bond, by A against B and C:</p> <p>1. An examination by both parties, of the books and accounts, within two months from the date of the bond and the reaching of a conclusion in this way between them, was not necessary as a condition precedent to a recovery against C.</p> <p>2. The amount due A had been judicially ascertained by the action of account render, and C having refused to pay this sum on demand, A was entitled to judgment against him for the amount of the judgment in that suit, with interest thereon and the costs of that proceeding.</p> <p>8. In this action, the appearance docket entry, and the flies in the account render suit, were admissible in evidence; but evidence tending to reduce the amount of the judgment in the account render suit was not admissible.</p>