Sletor v. Oram

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Sletor v. Oram

1 Whart. 106, 1836 Pa. LEXIS 173

DecidedJanuary 22, 1836

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Whart. 106 (Sletor v. Oram) 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.

Bluebook

Sletor v. Oram, 1 Whart. 106, 1836 Pa. LEXIS 173 (Pa. 1836).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The remark made by the judge who delivered the opinion- of the court, in the case of Feather’s Appeal, was a mere suggestion. The point was not considered by the court, as it was not necessarily involved in the determination of that case. We have since decided, after argument, in two cases, (Gest v. Hieskell, at the last term in Philadelphia, and a case at Pittsburgh,) that a discharge under the insolvent laws, does not prevent the statute of limitations from running against the creditor. The question must now be considered at rest.

Judgment reversed.

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

Per Curiam.

The remark made by the judge who delivered the opinion- of the court, in the case of Feather’s Appeal, was a mere suggestion. The point was not considered by the court, as it was not necessarily involved in the determination of that case. We have since decided, after argument, in two cases, (Gest v. Hieskell, at the last term in Philadelphia, and a case at Pittsburgh,) that a discharge under the insolvent laws, does not prevent the statute of limitations from running against the creditor. The question must now be considered at rest.

Judgment reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Whart. 106, 1836 Pa. LEXIS 173, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sletor-v-oram-pa-1836.