Payne v. Grant

Citations

• 81 Va. 164
• 1885 Va. LEXIS 20

Syllabus

<p>1. Practice at Common Law — Declaration — Demurrer.—Where declaration in suit for damages for breach of contract avers a distinct promise, a valuable consideration therefor, and a breach thereof, it is sufficient.</p> <p>2- Idem—Pleadings—Contract—Evidence—Inducement.—Por purposes of pleading, no difference exists between promises express and promises implied, and same form of description is used for both; and the promise set up may be established by proof direct, or by proof inferred from acts. A third person's contract may be stated as matter of inducement, whilst the promise actually declared on is that of the defendant.</p> <p>3. Idem—New trial—Evidence certified,—Case at bar.—A case to which is applied the rule of this court from Bennett v. Hardaway, 6 Munf. 125, down to Taylor’s Case, 77 Va. 692, inclusive, which discard exceptor’s oral evidence, and gives full credit to exceptee’s.</p> <p>4. Idem—Dismission—Res judicata.—-Dismission of suit on its merits at the hearing, whether on plea in bar or demurrer for want of equity or cause of action, is a bar to another suit for the same subject matter between the same parties, unless the dismission be “ without prejudice,’’ etc. Durant v. Essex Co., 7 Wall. 107.</p> <p>5. Idem—New trial—Instructions.— Error in giving or refusing to give certain instructions, or in admitting or refusing to admit certain evidence, affords no ground for reversing a judgment,' when it is evident that the appellant could not have been injured thereby. Brighthope Railway Co. v. Rogers, 76 Va. 443; Harman v. Lynchburg, 33 Gratt. 43.</p>