Legal Opinion

Bangs v. Hall

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided September 15, 1824Published

This action, which was assumpsit for goods sold and delivered and money had and received, was brought originally before a justice of the peace, and was carried by appeal into the Court of Common Pleas. The defendant pleaded the general issue and relied on the statute of limitations. St. 1786, c. 52. The writ was dated on the 25th of November, 1822." The plaintiff, to support the issue on his part, offered in evidence the following order: — 11 Mr. Joseph Bangs.

Read the full summary

This action, which was assumpsit for goods sold and delivered and money had and received, was brought originally before a justice of the peace, and was carried by appeal into the Court of Common Pleas. The defendant pleaded the general issue and relied on the statute of limitations. St. 1786, c. 52. The writ was dated on the 25th of November, 1822." The plaintiff, to support the issue on his part, offered in evidence the following order: — 11 Mr. Joseph Bangs. Sir, Please deliver the bearer eleven bushels of plaster for Libni Hall, who will indorse it on your due bill. Libni Hall.’’ A witness…

1Opinion of the Court

Putnam J.

It was not without much hesitation that the courts of law in England departed from the positive words of the statute for the limitation of personal actions, and admitted that a conditional promise within six years should take a case out of the statute. That question came up in the case of Heylin v. Hastings, where Lord Holt was chief justice. It is reported in Carth. 470; 1 Salk. 29 ; 1 Ld. Raym. 389 ; and Com. 54. There the defendant denied that he had bought the goods, but promised to pay for them if the plaintiff could prove it, and the plaintiff did prove that the defendant had…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Elmendorf v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1825
  2. Bell v. MorrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
  3. Beach v. President of the Fulton BankCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1829
  4. Moore v. President of the Bank of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1832
  5. Coulson v. WaltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1835

6 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