Jameson v. Jameson

• Decision Date: 31 October 1880
• Citation: 72 Mo. 640
• Parties: JAMESON v. JAMESON, Plaintiff in Error.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

72 Mo. 640

JAMESON

v.JAMESON, Plaintiff in Error.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

October Term, 1880.

Error to Shelby Circuit Court.--HON. JOHN T. REDD, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

James Carr and W. O. L. Jewett for plaintiff in error.

The note was payable on demand. In such case the statute of limitations begins to run as soon as the note is made without any demand. Easton v. McAllister, 1 Mo. 662; Hill v. Henry, 17 Ohio 9; Little v. Blunt, 9 Pick. 488; Waters v. Earl of Thanet, 2 Q. B. 757; Palmer v. Palmer, 36 Mich. 487; Haggin v. Williamson, 5 T. B. Mon. 8; Darnall v. Magruder, 1 Harr. & Gill 439; Rabsuhl v. Lack, 35 Mo. 316. On the other hand, if demand was necessary before action could be brought, it should have been made within ten years. Palmer v. Palmer, supra; Laforge v. Jayne, 9 Barr 410; Codman v. Rogers, 10 Pick. 112.

NORTON, J.

In July, 1876, plaintiff exhibited in the probate court of Shelby county, against the estate of James Jameson, deceased, of which defendant was administrator, the following demand, viz:

“One day after date, I promise to pay to Elizabeth Jameson the sum of $600, with interest at the rate of six per cent per annum from the 14th day of October, 1853, as witness my hand this 1st day of November, 1859. The condition of the above obligation is such, that if the above named Elizabeth Jameson shall demand any or all of the above during her natural life, it shall be due and payable according to the tenor of the above; but in case of her death before any or all of the above shall be liquidated, it shall remain with me and my heirs forever as my portion of her estate. Witness my hand, etc.

JAMES JAMESON.”

Upon the trial in the Shelby county circuit court where the cause had been taken by appeal, judgment was rendered for plaintiff in the sum of $1,463.80, from which defendant has appealed to this court.

From the bill of exceptions it appears that plaintiff admitted that James Jameson died intestate in August, 1875, and that plaintiff had never demanded payment of the sum of money specified in the instrument of writing, or any part thereof, of Jameson, and that no demand for the payment was made until the 3rd day of June, 1876. It was admitted by defendant that the instrument sued on had been given by the deceased to plaintiff for a prior indebtedness, plaintiff being a widow and having resided with decedent, who was her son.

The only question presented by the record is, whether plaintiff's action is barred by the statute of limitations. It is insisted by defendant's counsel that it is; 1st, Because the obligation sued upon is a promise to pay money on demand, and the cause of action accrued thereon the day after its date. 2nd, Because if necessary to make demand before the right of action accrued, such demand not having been made within ten years from the date of the instrument, the statutory bar applies. It is well settled that the statute of limitations begins to run against a note payable...