Safford v. Barney

121 Mass. 300, 1876 Mass. LEXIS 362
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided November 14, 1876·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Gray, C. J.

Under the Gen. Sts. <?. 155, § 5, which provide that, “ in actions of contract, brought to recover the balance due upon a mutual and open account current, the cause of action shall be deemed to have accrued at the time of the last item proved in the account,” it is sufficient to prove mutual deal ings between the parties, consisting of sales made, or services performed, by each party, to or for the other, creating mutual debts, and which by mutual agreement are to be set off against one another, and are entered in an account stated by the plaintiff, even if no balance has been struck; and the statute of limitations, begins to run only from the date of the last item on either side of the account. The case is governed by Penniman v. Rotch, 3 Met. 216. Judgment affirmed.

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

Safford v. Barney, 121 Mass. 300, 1876 Mass. LEXIS 362 (Mass. 1876).

121 Mass. 300 (Safford v. Barney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Abele v. Dietz
7 Mass. App. Div. 125 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1942)
Collamore v. Cliftondale Woodworking Co.
2 Mass. App. Div. 288 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1937)
Markiewicz v. Toton
198 N.E. 659 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1935)
Kennedy v. Drake
114 N.E. 310 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1916)
Harding v. Covell
104 N.E. 452 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1914)
Kingsley v. Delano
47 N.E. 1013 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1897)
Day v. Mayo
28 N.E. 898 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1891)
Eldridge v. Smith
10 N.E. 717 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1887)