2370 ARTICLE 75.

own right, if proper words are used to show that the cause of action occurred
between the persons they respectively represent.

(106) It shall not be necessary in any case to make profert in.a declara-
tion or plea, but the opposite party shall be entitled to oyer in the same
manner as if profert were made.

The opposite party is only entitled to oyer in cases in which before adoption of
this sub-section, profert was necessary. Oyer cannot properly be craved of a bond
which is a public record, but if it is craved, the demand may be complied with by
a certified copy. State v. Wilson, 107 Md. 131.

(107) Either party may use the common law forms or the forms here-
inbefore given, at his election; and either party may require a bill of
particulars where the pleading is so general as not to give sufficient notice
to the opposite party of the evidence to be offered in support of it; provided
that in all jurisdictions where provision has been or shall be made for the
obtention of speedy judgments, when the cause of action filed with the
declaration shall set forth the plaintiff's claim with the particularity re-
quired for a bill of particulars, the said cause of action shall become and
be taken and treated as one of the pleadings in the case, and the plaintiff
shall be restricted in his evidence to proof of the items so set out.1

The action of trial court in refusing a demand for a bill of particulars and for
extension of time to plead held prejudicial error. Distinction between incorporating
an account in narr, and attaching an account to narr. Office and effect of bill of
particulars. Newbold v. Green, 122 Md. 652 (decided prior to act of 1914, ch. 378).

Although there is no demand for bill of particulars, if suit is under practice act,
the account filed with declaration takes the place of bill of particulars under this
section. Common counts may be joined with special ones, though bill of particulars
shows there was a special contract. Conservation Co. v. Stimpson, 136 Md. 319.

A bill of particulars which sets out "to money received by the defendants from
the plaintiff's intestate, to wit," etc., is insufficient. Bill of particulars should be
specific like an account under speedy judgment act. Stocksdale v. Jones, 133 Md. 179.

Where a suit is not brought under speedy judgment act, plaintiff is not restricted
in his evidence by this sub-section to account filed with declaration. Fast v. Austin,
135 Md. 20.

Where an account filed with a narr, contains no item for loss of profit caused by
alleged breach of contract, evidence of such lost profit is inadmissible; reversible
error. Aitz Chaim Congregation v. Butterhoff, 141 Md. 276.

This sub-section is but expression of previous practice. When bill of particulars
is properly demandable. Black v. Woodrow, 39 Md. 212.

This sub-section does not require that bill of particulars disclose plaintiff's wit-
nesses. Office and effect of bill of particulars. Cairnes v. Pelton, 103 Md. 44.

The first clause of this sub-section referred to in deciding that the actions of debt
and assumpsit could not be joined. Smith v. State, 66 Md. 219.

(108) Whenever the partnership of any parties, or the incorporation of
any alleged corporation, or the execution of any written instrument filed in
the case is alleged in the pleadings in any action or matter at law, the same
shall be taken as admitted for the purpose of said action or matter, unless
the same shall be denied by the next succeeding pleading of the opposite
party or parties.

While under this section the fact that defendants are partners may be admitted,
such admission does not carry with it the further admission that suit was on a
partnership transaction or that what one partner did in reference to it necessarily
bound the other. Tippett v. Meyers, 127 Md. 531.

1 Thus amended by the act of 1914, ch. 378.