Smith v. Blachley
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeals, Nos. 106 and 107, Oct. T., 1900, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Feb. T., 1896, Nos. 18 and 74, on verdict for plaintiffs in cases of John H. Smith and James M. Burroughs, executors of Joseph Beabout, deceased, v. Oliver L. Blachley, and John McCullough v. Oliver L. Blachley. Assumpsit for money had and received.
Read the full summary
Appeals, Nos. 106 and 107, Oct. T., 1900, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Feb. T., 1896, Nos. 18 and 74, on verdict for plaintiffs in cases of John H. Smith and James M. Burroughs, executors of Joseph Beabout, deceased, v. Oliver L. Blachley, and John McCullough v. Oliver L. Blachley. Assumpsit for money had and received. Before Kennedy, P. J. At the trial it appeared that in 1888, plaintiffs paid to defendant the sum of $8,000 for the purpose of preventing the bringing of an alleged criminal prosecution against them and different members of their family, on the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice Mitchell,
The general rule that statutes of limitation run from the act complained of in cases of tort as well as of contract, admits a well settled exception on account of fraud. The exception was not originally in the statutes themselves but was introduced by the courts acting upon principles of equity, though in many states (not, however, including Pennsylvania) the statutes have now been framed to cover and define the excepted cases explicitly.
But the limits of the exception and the circumstances under which it will be permitted have led to much conflict in the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Traer v. ClewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Troup v. Executors of SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1822
- Scranton Gas & Water Co. v. Lackawanna Iron & Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Smith v. BlachleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Campbell's Administrator v. BoggsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1855
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by67 opinions
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,975 Michelle K. Tomera, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Arthur T. Galt, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1975
- Overfield v. Pennroad CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1944
- Deemer v. Weaver, Exrx.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Lutherland, Inc. v. DahlenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
- Beauty Time, Inc. Beauty Makers, Inc. & R. Richard Riso v. Vu Skin Systems, Inc. Bjv Dpm Skin Systems, Inc. & Marion M. VujevichCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1997
62 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.