Reek v. Lutz , 90 R.I. 340 ( 1960 )

Condon, C. J.

I concur in the decision overruling the exception to the sustaining of the demurrer to the first count. I dissent to the remainder of the decision for the reason that in my opinion- the second and third counts of the declarations are vague and uncertain and fail to apprise the defendants of what they will be called upon to meet at the trial. In other words I do not agree with the majority that these counts are drawn with the preciseness and definiteness which the nature of the case reasonably permits, and therefore they do not meet the requirements of the rule of pleading as declared in Lee v. Reliance Mills Co., 21 R. I. 322.