Legal Opinion
McNeill v. Jamison
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided August 2, 1955No. 1657PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CAYTON, Chief Judge.
This suit involved a claim which had earlier been filed in a probate case and rejected by the executrix. The question before fis is whether the trial court was correct in ruling that the claim was barred by a special statute of limitations.
Messrs. McNeill and Fuller sued in the Municipal Court for legal services allegedly performed for Sarah L. Jamison and for her estate. They named as defendants Maude S. Jamison (not as executrix, but individually), and the surety on her undertaking. After a trial on the merits the trial judge sustained defendants’ contention that the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Clawans v. SheetzCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1937
- Kalis v. LeahyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1951
- Marks v. Frigidaire Sales Corp.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1931
- Brown v. Randle & Garvin, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1943
- Hawley v. HawleyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1940
3Cited by9 opinions
- Kumar v. District of Columbia Water & Sewer AuthorityDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2011
- Jung v. George Washington UniversityDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- District of Columbia v. FaisonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1971
- Sowell v. WalkerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2000
- Washington v. Government of District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1959
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.