Legal Opinion

O'NEIL v. Estate of Murtha

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided December 8, 1997No. 39895-4-IPublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWebster, J.

Terri L. Murtha made an oral agreement with Terrance O’Neil to repay him a $15,695.39 loan when she was “able” to do so. O’Neil seeks repayment of the loan with interest from Murtha’s estate, and the sole question is whether his claim is barred by the statute of limitations under ROW 4.16.080(3). We adopt the majority view and hold that where a debtor promises to pay “when able,” such cause of action accrues when the debtor in fact becomes financially able to pay, regardless of whether the creditor was aware of the debtor’s ability to pay. We therefore conclude that the trial court did not…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Cowiche Canyon Conservancy v. BosleyWashington Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Crisman v. CrismanCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1997
  3. Goodman v. Darden, Doman & Stafford AssociatesWashington Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Crisman v. CrismanCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1997
  5. Tebo v. . RobinsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1885

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Shepard v. HolmesCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
  2. HIPPLE v. McFaddenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
  3. Huff v. RoachCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2005
  4. Rieger v. BennettCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2004
  5. Hipple v. McFaddenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011

6 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