Legal Opinion

Taylor's Adm'rs v. Witman's Adm'rs

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 25, 1861PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Assumpsit. — Error to the Court of Commoa Pleas of 'Berks County.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered

by Strong, J.

This is not the case of a note payable on demand, where the statute begins to run from the date of the note or promise, and where no other demand is necessary than such as is involved in the bringing of the action. There never was any right of action, until a proper release was procured for the share of William Witman in the property sold to Taylor. There was no promise to pay before such a release was procured, nor, indeed, was there any debt, for the conveyance of the land was the consideration out of which grew the indebtedness and the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Wenman v. Mohawk InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1835

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Tomlinson v. Armour & Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1908
  2. Cook v. CarpenterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
  3. Swearingen v. Sewickley Dairy Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
  4. Milne's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1882
  5. First National Bank v. BartlettSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1908

4 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