Opinion
No. 38130.
December 10, 1951.
1. Money received — open account — money advanced.
An action for a single sum of money advanced for the payment of an insurance premium, is an action for money received and not on open account, although treated as such, and there was no occasion to itemize the claim.
2. Insurance — parties — plea in abatement.
Where money had been advanced by the plaintiff at defendant's request to pay defendant's premium on a policy of insurance and the money was paid by the plaintiff directly to the insurance company, the company was not a proper party to the action and a plea of abatement raising that question was properly rejected.
Headnotes as approved by Alexander, J.
APPEAL from the circuit court of Copiah County; J.F. GUYNES, Judge.
W.M. Broome, for appellant.
Jno. T. Armstrong, and Luther E. Grice, for appellee.
Suit was brought upon an account for Sixty-Five Dollars by Browning who recovered judgment therefor in the court of a justice of the peace, and likewise upon appeal to the circuit court.
Among the errors assigned are: (1) striking appellant's plea in abatement; (2) permitting appellee to amend his bill of particulars; and, (3) granting to appellee a peremptory instruction.
(Hn 1) The nature of the action seems not thoroughly to have been analyzed. The demand by Browning arose out of a loan or advance made by him to Gaddy for the purpose of paying a premium upon a policy of crop insurance. Although treated as an open account, the action was one for money received. There was no occasion to itemize the claim; there was only one sum or item involved.
(Hn 2) In view of the incident that the money advanced by Browning was to pay for insurance to be issued by a company of which he was a member, Gaddy interposed a plea in abatement raising the point of a defect in parties plaintiff. There are several reasons why the court properly struck out this plea, among which is the revelation upon the hearing upon the plea that the indebtedness was an obligation between Browning and Gaddy. Browning turned the money, advanced for Gaddy's account, over to the company, which being fully paid, had and sought no cause of action.
We find no error in striking the plea in abatement nor in the granting of a directed verdict for appellee, in view of the uncontradicted testimony of Browning that the amount in suit had been advanced by him at the request of Gaddy and for his account and had not been repaid.
Affirmed.
Hall, J., took no part in the decision of this case.