Williams' Administrators v. Williams' Administrators
Ohio Supreme Court
This is an action of assumpsit for money paid. Issue is taken •upon the pleas of non assumpsit and non assumpsit within six years. The case was submitted to the court in Pickaway county, on an agreed statement of facts, and adjourned for decision here.
Read the full summary
This is an action of assumpsit for money paid. Issue is taken •upon the pleas of non assumpsit and non assumpsit within six years. The case was submitted to the court in Pickaway county, on an agreed statement of facts, and adjourned for decision here. The material facts agreed are, that Edward and Isaac Williams entered into a joint and several bond to one Heath, for twenty-two hundred and nine dollars, which fell due on September 14, 1817. Each was to pay a moiety of the debt. After the bond fell •due, though more than six years before the suit commenced, Edward paid the obligee a small…
1Opinion of the Court
Wright, J\,
delivered the opinion of the court:
Four questions are raised by counsel for our decision in this case-
1. Whether the action of assumjisit was limited at all by the act of 1810, which was in force when these payments were made.
2. *Whether this class'of cases does not so far relate to the execution of a trust as to be without the statute of limitations.
3. From what time the statute begins to run; whether from each payment of a part; from the payment of the entire sum only, or from the period when the original obligation would be barred.
4. Whether the action accrues to one paying…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Murray v. CosterCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1822
- Penniman v. VintonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
3Cited by3 opinions
- Barber v. GillsonNevada Supreme Court · 1883
- Wood v. PerrySupreme Court of Iowa · 1859
- McAdams v. DunsonOhio Court of Appeals · 1915