Wharton v. Lowrey
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania
Bill in equity. The bill was filed in October. 1793, to open an account which had been settled and signed by the complainants in April. 17.31. touching the transactions between the testator and the defendant, while commissaries in the American army, during the Revolutionary war. The bill charged the defendant tamong other fraudulent practices) with making erasures in the complainant's books, and also set forth a number of specific-errors and overcharges in the account.
Read the full summary
Bill in equity. The bill was filed in October. 1793, to open an account which had been settled and signed by the complainants in April. 17.31. touching the transactions between the testator and the defendant, while commissaries in the American army, during the Revolutionary war. The bill charged the defendant tamong other fraudulent practices) with making erasures in the complainant's books, and also set forth a number of specific-errors and overcharges in the account. The defendant filed an answer to the bill, in which he denied all fraud, canvassed and refuted the specification of errors…
1Opinion of the Court
BY THE COURT.
Considerations respecting the merits of the cause ought not to weigh in the determination of the present question. The complainant could not foresee that the statute of limitations would be pleaded, and it is in order to bring before the court an essential fact arising from that plea, that the amendment is proposed. The rule made absolute.
2Cited by15 opinions
- Persons v. JonesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1853
- (PS) Boddie v. Blue Diamond GrowersDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025
- (PS) Holmstrand v. Mercy Housing of CaliforniaDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025
- (PS) Murphy v. Federal Bureau of InvestigationDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
- (PS) Rogers v. ValeroDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.