Lee v. Cassin

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

Lee v. Cassin

15 F. Cas. 146, 2 D.C. 112, 2 Cranch 112

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia·Decided June 15, 1815·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

The CotrRT,

(Morsell, J., not sitting,)

was of opinion that on a note payable on demand, the cause of action does not accrue so as to make the statute of limitations begin to run until a demand be made. That the removal of the defendant from Massachusetts, before the cause of action accrued, was a bar to the statute of limitations of Massachusetts; and the replication that the plaintiff was beyond seas, was a bar to the statute of Maryland.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The CotrRT,

(Morsell, J., not sitting,)

was of opinion that on a note payable on demand, the cause of action does not accrue so as to make the statute of limitations begin to run until a demand be made. That the removal of the defendant from Massachusetts, before the cause of action accrued, was a bar to the statute of limitations of Massachusetts; and the replication that the plaintiff was beyond seas, was a bar to the statute of Maryland.

Lee v. Cassin, 15 F. Cas. 146, 2 D.C. 112, 2 Cranch 112 (circtddc 1815).

Pincite

15 F. Cas. 146 (Lee v. Cassin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related