Wharton v. Lowrey
29 F. Cas. 855, 2 U.S. 364, 2 Dall. 364
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania·Decided July 1, 1796·Published·Cited by 11 cases
Opinion
Considerations respecting the merits of the cause ought not to weigh in the determination of the present question. The complainant could not foresee that the statute of limitations would be pleaded, and it is in order to bring before the court an essential fact arising from that plea, that the amendment is proposed. The rule made absolute.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Wharton v. Lowrey, 29 F. Cas. 855, 2 U.S. 364, 2 Dall. 364 (circtdpa 1796).
29 F. Cas. 855 (Wharton v. Lowrey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Untitled Case
E.D. California, 2026
Untitled Case
E.D. California, 2026
Untitled Case
E.D. California, 2026
Rochanda Zigler, et. al. v. Nelnet, et. al.
E.D. California, 2025
(PS) Holmstrand v. Mercy Housing of California
E.D. California, 2025
(PS) Rogers v. Valero
E.D. California, 2025
(PS) Boddie v. Blue Diamond Growers
E.D. California, 2025
Kennison v. DeCarlo
D. Nevada, 2022
(PS) Murphy v. Federal Bureau of Investigation
E.D. California, 2021
Stiegler v. Neven
D. Nevada, 2021
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Lee
S.D. California, 2019
Persons v. Jones
12 Ga. 371 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1853)
Binney's Case
2 Md. Ch. 99 (Maryland Chancery Ct, 1829)
Salmon v. Clagett
3 Md. Ch. 125 (Maryland Chancery Ct, 1828)