Union Bank v. Planters' Bank
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Appeal from Prince George’s county court. This was an action of assumpsit, commenced on the 11th November, 1834, by the appellants against the appellees. The plaintiffs below declared for money had and received; money lent and advanced; paid, laid out, and expended; and upon an insimul computassent. The defendants pleaded non-assumpsit; non-assumpsit infra tres annos, and actio non infra, &c. On these pleas issues were joined.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Prince George’s county court. This was an action of assumpsit, commenced on the 11th November, 1834, by the appellants against the appellees. The plaintiffs below declared for money had and received; money lent and advanced; paid, laid out, and expended; and upon an insimul computassent. The defendants pleaded non-assumpsit; non-assumpsit infra tres annos, and actio non infra, &c. On these pleas issues were joined. At the trial of the cause the following exceptions were taken: 1st Exception. — In this case, the plaintiffs, an incorporated bank of the District of Columbia, proved…
1Opinion of the CourtArcher., Judge
We think the court were in error in the first bill of exceptions, in not granting the plaintiffs’ prayer; that the jury were at liberty to infer from the silence of the defendant, their acquiescence in the correctness of the account rendered by the plaintiffs to the defendants.
These accounts, according to the proof offered in this exception, were rendered to the defendants according to the usage as proved, and as it was further proved, that in case there should be any exception taken to the accounts, such exception or disagreement, was, by usage, notified to the plaintiff, and no such…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Hanson v. Campbell's LesseeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1863