
    Hunter v. Stender.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, Third Department.
    
    May 26, 1890.)
    Pleading—Bill of Pabtioülabs—Action on Account.
    A complaint alleged that plaintiff, between certain dates, rendered defendant’» testator services and advanced him money, in all of the value of $2,000; that they adjusted their accounts at $2,000, and agreed that the same should be payable at testator’s death, and that he would make testamentary provision to that effect; and that testator died without having paid or made provision for the payment of said sum. Held that, as the complaint stated a cause of action on an account, as well as on the account stated and promise of testamentary provision, plaintiff would be required to furnish the items of her account.
    Appeal from special term, Albany county.
    Action by Margaret J. Hunter against Emma E. Stender, executrix, etc., of Smith Quackenbush, deceased. A motion to require plaintiff to furnish a bill of particulars was denied, and defendant appeals.
    Argued before Learned, P. J., and Landon and Mayham, JJ.
    Be Witt & Spoor, for appellant. 27. C. Moak, for respondent.
   Landon, J.

The complaint alleges that the plaintiff from September 1, 1879, to July 6, 1881, rendered the testator services and advanced him money, in all of the value of $2,000; that on that day she and the testator adjusted the accounts between them at $2,000, and agreed that the same should be payable at his death, and that he would make provision to that effect in his will; that the testator did make provision to that effect in his will, but by a subsequent will revoked it, and died in 1887 without having paid, or having made provision for the payment of, the said sum. The answer puts in issue the rendition of services, the loan of money, the accounting and promise, and the making of any will making provision for plaintiff; pleads payment, and the statute of limitations. The complaint is framed in a double aspect,—to recover either upon the account, or upon the account stated, and the promise to provide for payment of the amount by will. Under the first aspect of the complaint, we think it reasonable that the plaintiff should furnish the items of her account. The plaintiff’s contention that the action is not upon the account, but upon the account stated, and promise of testamentary pro. vision for its payment, may prove to be true upon the trial; but, as the com. plaint is framed, the action upon the account seems to be sufficiently stated. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with $10 costs. All concur.  