Legal Opinion

Whitney, Clark & Co. v. Chambers

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1885PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Error to the district court of Hamilton county. Tried below before George W. Post, J. Letson v. Kenyon, 1 Pac. Rep., 562. Sornberger v. Lee, 14 Neb., 193. Stoddard v. Roane, 16 Ohio State, 566. Pickett v. King, 34 Barb., 193. Angelí on Limitations, 249. Winchell v. Hicks, 18 New York, 567. Roosevelt v. Marks, 6 Johns. Ch., 266. Marienthal v. Mosler, 16 Ohio State, 566.

1Opinion of the Court

Cobb, Ch. J.

There is but one question presented by the record in this case. The action in the court below was brought on two several promissory notes, one of which became due sixty and the other ninety days after the twenty-fifth day of January, 1877. The action was brought on the seventh day of October, 1882. So that upon their face the notes were barred by the statute, full five years having elapsed after the maturity of the notes when the action was brought. But upon the back of each of said notes appear two endorsements, one of $34.50, the twentieth of April, 1878, the other of $6.90 the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Pickett v. KingNew York Supreme Court · 1861
  2. Sornberger v. LeeNebraska Supreme Court · 1883

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Regan v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
  2. McLaughlin v. SenneNebraska Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Moffitt v. CarrNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Bosler v. McShaneNebraska Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Holloway Et Ux v. WetzelUtah Supreme Court · 1935

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