Morrell and Others v Frith, Clerk
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1838 |
| Date | 01 January 1838 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 150 E.R. 1201
EXCH. OF PLEAS.
S. C. 1 H. & H. 100; 7 L. J. Ex. 172, 2 Jur. 619.
[402] keports of cases argued and determined in the courts of exchequer, and exchequer chamber, easter term, 1 victoria. morrell and others v. frith, Clerk. Exch. of Pleas. 1838.-The following letter from the defendant to the plaintiffs' attorney was held not to be a sufficient acknowledgment of a debt to take the case out of the Statute of Limitations:-"Since the receipt of your letter, (arid indeed for some time previously), I have been in almost daily expectation of being enabled to give a satisfactory reply to your application respecting the demand of Messrs. M. against me. I propose being in Oxford tomorrow, when I will call upon you on the matter."-The construction of u doubtful document, given in evidence to defeat the Statute of Limitations, is for the Court, and not for the jury. If it be explained by extrinsic facts, they are for the consideration of the jury. [S. C. 1 H. & H. 100; 7 L. J. Ex. 172; 2 Jur. 619.] Aasumpsit for money lent, interest, and on an account stated. Pleas, non asaumpsit, and the Statute of Limitations. At the trial before Gurney, B., at the last Oxford Assizes, it appeared that the defendant being indebted to the plaintiffs, who were bankers at Oxford, in a balance of 4791., (which had been due above six years,) the plaintiffs' attorney, in May, 1837, applied to him on their behalf, by letter, requesting him to remit the balance due to them, or if not convenient, to inform him what arrangements he had to propose for the settlement of his account. No answer being given to this application, the plaintiffs' attorney, on the 13th of June, again 1202! MORRELL, V. FRITH 3M. &W.403. [403] vrote to the defendant, requesting to know in what way, or at what time, he proposed to pay the balance, or what security he could give for it. On the 28th of July, he received from the defendant the following letter : - ; " 28th J uly, 1 837. " Sir, - Since the receipt of your letter, (and indeed for some time previously,) I have been in almost daily expectation of being enabled to give a satisfactory reply to your first application respecting the demand of Messrs. Morrell against me. I propose being in Oxford to-morrow morning, when I will call upon you on the matter.- I am, Sir, &c. " W. 0. It was contended for the plaintiffs, that this letter was a sufficient acknowledgment in writing to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hodsden against Harridge
...38, Kennett v. Milbank. 1 M. & Sc. 102, S. C. 2 Bing. N. C. 241, Linsell v. Bonsor. 2 Scott, 399, S. C. 5 Dowl. 570, Poynder v. Stuck. 3 M. & W. 402, Moirell v. Frith. 6 M. & W. 829, Waugk v. Cope, per Lord Abinger. 8 A. & E. 221, Boutledge v. Ramsay. 3 N. & P. 319, S. C. 9 C. & P. 209, Buc......
-
Treacy v Robinson Son, Ltd and Others McGovern v Same defendants
...R. 322. (19) 43 Ir. L. T. R. 210. (20) [1911] 2 I. R. 489. (21) [1922] 2 K. B. 87. (22) [1921] 2 I. R. 274. (23) [1932] I. R. 726. (24) 3 M. & W. 402. (25) [1926] I. R. 40. (1) [1922] 2 K. B. 87. (2) [1921] 2 K. B. 664. (3) [1921] 2 I. R. 274. (4) 6 C. & P. 501. (5) L. R. 4 Q. B. 476. (6) 1......
-
Edmonds v Goater
...Mr. Glasse and Mr. Welford, in support of the exceptions, cited-9 Geo. 4, c. 14; Tanner v. Smart (6 B. & C. 603); Mmrell v. Frith (3 M. & W. 402); tipmg v. WrigU (9 M. & W. 629); Hart v. Prendergast (14 M. & W. 741); Rmttledge v. Ramsay (8 A. & E. 221); Cawley v. Furnell (20 L. J. (N. S.) C......
-
Crawford v Crawford
...Hare, 299. Williams v. EverettENR 14 East, 582. Tanner v. SmartENR 6 B. & C. 603. Leland v. Murphy 16 Ir. Ch. R. 500. Morrell v. FrithENR 3 M. & W. 402. Hart v. PrendergastENR 14 M. & W. 741. Phillips v. PhillipsENR 3 Hare, 299. Hart v. PrendergastENR 14 M. & W. 745. Beckett v. ChurchENR 9 ......