Howard v. First Presbyterian Church & Society of Pontiac
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Oakland. (Stickney, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. "Where one borrows money for the use of another as the latter’s security, the statute of limitations does not run against his claim for reimbursement until he himself has been compelled to pay: Odlim, v. Green-leaf 3 N. H. 210; Ponder v. Garter 12 Ired. 242; Crosby v. Wyatt 23 Me. 156; Thompson v. Stevens 2 N. & McC. 493 ; Sooit v. Nichols 21 Miss. 94; Wesley Church v. Moore lORenn.
Read the full summary
Error to Oakland. (Stickney, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. "Where one borrows money for the use of another as the latter’s security, the statute of limitations does not run against his claim for reimbursement until he himself has been compelled to pay: Odlim, v. Green-leaf 3 N. H. 210; Ponder v. Garter 12 Ired. 242; Crosby v. Wyatt 23 Me. 156; Thompson v. Stevens 2 N. & McC. 493 ; Sooit v. Nichols 21 Miss. 94; Wesley Church v. Moore lORenn. St. 213; Maxey v. Garter 10 Yerg. 521; Lowndes v. Pvnckney 1 Rich. Eq. 155; Sherwood v. Dunbar 6 Cal. 53 ; Presla/r v. Stallworth 31 Ala. 402.
1Opinion of the Court
Graves, O. J.
This action was brought on the 5th of April, 1881, to recover $388, alleged to have been paid to .the defendant’s use, by the plaintiff, on the 6th of April, 1815. The plaintiff recovered a verdict for the amount, with interest, and the defendant brings error. The defendant urged several reasons against the, maintenance of the action, of which one was that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations.
It appears that in March, 1810, the society passed a resolution appointing the plaintiff, together with A. C. Baldwin, E. W. Peck, Goodman Jacobs, D. C. Kellam, and A. Lull, a…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Grant v. WilliamsNebraska Supreme Court · 1954
- Sullivan v. DeiterMichigan Supreme Court · 1891