Wright v. Mordaunt
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the circuit court of Warren county. Hon. W. Iv. MoLauriN, Judge. Wright, the appellant, was the plaintiff, and Mordaunt, the appellee, was defendant in the court below. The. opinion states the case.
Read the full summary
From the circuit court of Warren county. Hon. W. Iv. MoLauriN, Judge. Wright, the appellant, was the plaintiff, and Mordaunt, the appellee, was defendant in the court below. The. opinion states the case. The sections of the code of 1892 referred to are as follows: “2748 (2678). Absence from the state.- — If, after any cause of action have accrued in this state, the person against whom it has accrued be absent from and reside out of the state, the time of his absence shall not be taken as any part of the time limited for the commencement of the action, after his return.” “2754 (2684). Action…
1Opinion of the Court
OatuiooN, T.,
delivered the opinion of the court.
The promissory note sued on was executed in Illinois, payable in Illinois, and both parties resided in that state at the time of its execution and maturity. Its date is July 1, 1892, *539and it matured September 4, 1892. The law of Illinois does not bar actions on promissory notes until ten years have elapsed after maturity. In the spring of 1898 the maker, Mordarint, took up his residence in Mississippi, and, on June 6, 1899, he was sued on the note by the payee, Wright, and pleaded the six years statute of limitations, and, his demurrer to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Robinson v. MooreMississippi Supreme Court · 1898
3Cited by15 opinions
- Shewbrooks v. AC AND S. INC.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1988
- Mary Sheets v. Richard G. BurmanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1963
- Haggart v. WilczinskiCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1906
- Guthrie v. THE MERCHANTS NAT. BANKMississippi Supreme Court · 1965
- Kirsch v. LubinNew York Supreme Court · 1927
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.