Hughston v. Nail
Mississippi Supreme Court
Hughston v. Nail, 73 Miss. 284 (Miss. 1895)
Woods
Hughston v. Nail
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
The notes sued on were barred under § 2683, code of 1880. In Weir v. Monahan, 67 Miss., 434, this section was considered
The cases cited and relied on for a reversal — viz.: Clayton, Admr., v. Merritt, 52 Miss., 353; Cook v. Reynolds, 58 Miss., 243, and Boyce v. Francis, 56 Miss., 573—were all determined under § 2162, code of 1871, while that code was the law of the land, and before the code of 1880 was in existence.
The decree of the court below followed Weir v. Monahan, and is correct. There is nothing in the case to support appellant’s invocation of the doctrine of estoppel.
Affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- R. J. Hughston v. M. J. Nail
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Limitation of Actions. Death before bare complete. Code 1880, l 3683. Where suit was not brougiit until 1893 on certain promissory notes that were made in 1879, and fell due, respectively, on November 1, 1880, and November 1, 1881, the right of action was barred by limitation, notwithstanding the facts that the maker died on March 4, 1885, and there had been no administration of his estate; for, although the maker died before the expiration of the time limited for suit on the notes, the case is governed by $ 3683 of the code of 1880, which, in that event, allows suit to be brought within one year from the death of the party liable, and not within one year from the date of letters testamentary or of administration on his estate, as does g 3163 of the code of 1871. Weir v. Monahan, 67 Miss., 434, cited.