Wagstaff v. . Smith
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This bill prayed an account of the issues and profits of land, of which the plaintiff and defendant were tenants in common. The defence by plea and answer was the statute of limitations. Upon the proof, it turned out, that the bill was filed in the court, of Equity for Granville, in February, 1829, and a partition had been made of the land held in common in November, 1826.
1Opinion of the Court
Henderson, Chief-Justice,
after stating the above facts, proceeded : The statue of limitations commenced running when the partition was made, for it is not the receipt of each particular item of an account which puts the statute in motion, but the cesser of the privity or connection frompvhich the accountability’ arises. So long as that relationship or privity or connection continues, the statute does not commence running. During that time there is nothing adverse, no -withholding by the one, to the prejudice of the other. ' The very act of receiving affirms the confidential relationship in…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Northcot v. . CasperSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1849
- Etheridge v. EtheridgeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979