Legal Opinion

Goldsby v. Gentle

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 28, 1840PublishedCited by 6 opinions

ERROR to the Washington Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtBlackford, J.

This was an action of assumpsit brought by Gentle for goods sold and delivered, money paid, money had and received, on an account stated, &c. The reál demand, according to a bill of particulars filed, was for money which the plaintiff, as the surety of the defendants for the stay of an execution, had been obliged to pay to the execution-creditors. Pleas, 1. Non assumpsit; 2. Non assumpsit within five years; 3. That the action had not accrued within five years; 4. Payment. Replications.in denial of the pleas. Verdict for the defendants. New trial granted on the plaintiff’s motion. On the…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Bell v. MorrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1828

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. MortensenUtah Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Bishop v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1850
  3. Conwell v. BuchananIndiana Supreme Court · 1845
  4. Bond v. BaldwinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1850
  5. McNear v. RobersonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1895

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API