McKeehan v. Commonwealth
This text of 3 Pa. 151 (McKeehan v. Commonwealth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In The Commonwealth v. Baldwin, 1 Watts, 54, the point was fully investigated, and it was there held to be a settled principle, that the statutes of limitation do not extend to the Commonwealth, whether it be in the case of a personal action against a surety on an official bond, or entries on land, or like cases, unless the Commonwealth is expressly named, and her rights thereby waived; and it was decided that judgment 'in the name of the treasurer, for use of the. Commonwealth, is substantially a judgment for the Commonwealth, so as to exempt it from’ the operation of a statute limiting the period for which a judgment shall continue a lien. The same principle was applied in Ramsey’s Appeal, 4 Watts, 71, and not contested.
In addition, it may be remarked, that the 4th section of'the act of April 4, 1798, under which the question arises, uses the words, “ person or persons” having a cause of action, which could only by construction be extended’ to the Commonwealth; and’, moreover, orders double costs in cases of nonsuit or- judgment against the plaintiff, whereas .the Commonwealth pays no costs.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 Pa. 151, 1846 Pa. LEXIS 74, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mckeehan-v-commonwealth-pa-1846.