King's v. Coulter's
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland county. This was an action of debt on a sealed note from King to Coulter, for $>100, dated April 4, 1837, payable sixty days after date. Plea, payment. Replication,- non-solvit, and issue. William H. King, plaintiff in error’s testator, at the date of the note, was a merchant, doing business in Greensburgh, where his uncle, Richard. Coulter, also resided. The execution of the note to Mr. Coulter was not denied.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland county. This was an action of debt on a sealed note from King to Coulter, for $>100, dated April 4, 1837, payable sixty days after date. Plea, payment. Replication,- non-solvit, and issue. William H. King, plaintiff in error’s testator, at the date of the note, was a merchant, doing business in Greensburgh, where his uncle, Richard. Coulter, also resided. The execution of the note to Mr. Coulter was not denied. Mr. Coulter had an account in the store of Mr. King, and the books exhibited that account running from 1836, till March 12, 1839,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered December 15, 1853, by
Woodward, J.
— It was fifteen years, four months, and twenty-five days, after the sealed note of the plaintiff’s testator matured, before this action was instituted for its recovery. No legal presumption of payment, such as, unrebutted, the court would be bound to declare as a conclusion of law, arose in that time, for the authorities all agree in fixing twenty years, from analogy to the English Statute of Limitations, concerning real estate, as the period necessary to such a presumption. But the question is, whether the time that did…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Stewart v. McGuinNew York Supreme Court · 1823
3Cited by2 opinions
- Taylor v. GouldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868
- Smith's EstatePennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County · 1941