Patterson v. Hewitt
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL from the supreme court of the territory of NEW MEXICO. Appellants C. Ewing Patterson, a resident of New Jersey, .and Henry J. Patterson, a resident of New Mexico, on April 29, 1903, filed their bill of complaint in the District Court for Lincoln County, Territory of New Mexico, against John Y. Hewitt, William Watson, Mathew Hoyle, and Harvey B. Fergusson, residents of New Mexico, and the Old Abe Company, a corporation of the same Territory, to enforce a trust which is…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the supreme court of the territory of NEW MEXICO. Appellants C. Ewing Patterson, a resident of New Jersey, .and Henry J. Patterson, a resident of New Mexico, on April 29, 1903, filed their bill of complaint in the District Court for Lincoln County, Territory of New Mexico, against John Y. Hewitt, William Watson, Mathew Hoyle, and Harvey B. Fergusson, residents of New Mexico, and the Old Abe Company, a corporation of the same Territory, to enforce a trust which is alleged to have existed between the appellants and the defendant Hewitt, and by virtue of which they sought to recover…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Brown
The defense of laches, which prompted the dismissal of the bill in this case, has so often been made the subject of discussion in this court that a citation of cases is quite unnecessary. Some degree of diligence in bringing suit is required under all systems of jurisprudence. In actions at law, the question of diligence is determined by the words of the statute. If an action be brought the day before the statutory time expires, it will be sustained; if a day after, it will be defeated. In suits in equity the question is determined by the circumstances of each particular ease. The statute of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Twin-Lick Oil Co. v. MarburySupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Speidel v. HenriciSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Hayward v. National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Riddle v. WhitehillSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Alsop v. RikerSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by169 opinions
- Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Russell v. ToddSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Lavin v. Hackensack Bd. of Ed.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1982
- Woolley v. . StewartNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Jicarilla Apache Tribe v. AndrusCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1982
164 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.