Wagstaff v. Smith
John Wagstaff v. Charles Smith.
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Henderson, Chief-Justice, after stating the above facts, proceeded : The statue of limitations commenced running when the partition was made, for it is not the receipt of each particular item of an account which puts the statute in motion, but the cesser of the privity or connection frompvhich the accountability’ arises. So long as that relationship or privity or connection continues, the statute does not commence running. During that time there is nothing adverse, no -withholding by the one, to the prejudice of the other. ' The very act of receiving affirms the confidential relationship in law or in fact. Any other construction would destroy all confidence, and necessarily put a limit of three -years to all those confidential connections in pecuniary matters, which tend so much to facilitate the transactions of society. The defendant must come to an account.
Pee Curiam. — Decree accord inguy.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.