Stewart v. M'Bride
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. MPRlDE on the 29th November, 1809, brought an action on a promissory note against Stewart, in the District Court of the city and county of Philadelphia.
Read the full summary
In Error. MPRlDE on the 29th November, 1809, brought an action on a promissory note against Stewart, in the District Court of the city and county of Philadelphia. At the trial, after the jury were called, but before they were sworn, the defendant’s counsel moved to add a plea of recovery in a suit subsequently brought by the same plaintiff against the same defendant, for the same cause of action; which the court refused to permit, A general verdict was given for the plaintiff. The errors now assigned were, First, That the court refused permission to plead a former recovery for the same cause…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilgiímán C. j,
delivered the opinion of the. Court. The declaration contains two counts ; one on a promissory note dated February 16th, 1807"; the other on a note dated February 16th, 1809, each payable one year after date. The action was brought on the 29th November, 1809 ; so that the hote mentioned in the second count, was not due when this Suit Was commenced, The verdict was general; therefore the plaintiff has recovered on a cause of action which had not *203accrued when the suit was commenced. We have decided in other cases, that such an action cannot be supported. Indeed it is contrary to…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Roud v. GriffithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1824
- Corrigan v. Bank of America, N.A.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016
- Corrigan v. Bank of America, N.A.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016