Cummins v. Colgin
Supreme Court of Alabama
QUESTION IN THIS CASE. The statute of limitations — how affected Toy previous adjudication. In this case, an action of assumpsit was brought, by the plaintiff in error, in Sumter Circuit Court, against the defendant, administrator of Irby. The cause of action was a promissory note, executed by Irby, in his life-time, to one Comegys, and, by the latter assigned to the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
QUESTION IN THIS CASE. The statute of limitations — how affected Toy previous adjudication. In this case, an action of assumpsit was brought, by the plaintiff in error, in Sumter Circuit Court, against the defendant, administrator of Irby. The cause of action was a promissory note, executed by Irby, in his life-time, to one Comegys, and, by the latter assigned to the plaintiff. In defence to the action, the defendant pleaded— first, non-assumpsit; secondly, that the claim was not presented for payment, within the time prescribed by law; thirdly, nón-assumpsit infra sex annos; fourthly, actio…
1Opinion of the CourtHopkins, J.
The action in this case is assumpsit on a note. One of the pleas of the defendant is the statute of limitations, to which the plaintiff replied, that prior to the commencement of his action, the defendant had filed a bill in a Court of Equity a-gaint him ; that he had sought, in that suit, to obtain the allowance of the note, in abatement of the defendant’s demand ; but that, although it was admitted by the decree, which was made in the cause, to be due, it was disallowed; upon the ground, that the plaintiff’s right on it could not be enforced, by that Cqurt. That, upon the removal of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Grice v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1827