Chittenholm v. Griffin

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Drew,

This is an action in assumpsit for an agreed sum on an account stated. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff, Charles Chittenholm, and against defendant, S. E. Giffin, for the full amount claimed. After argument, the learned court below refused defendant’s motion for judgment non obstante veredicto; but granted his motion for a new trial, assigning as the sole reason therefor that the trial judge had not properly or adequately instructed the jury as to the statute of limitations. Both parties appealed — plaintiff contending that it was error to grant a new trial…