Case ID: del_1/html/0134-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "The Court\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE use of JOHN ABBOTT and WIFE vs. LEVIN STUART, administrator of JEHU STOCKLEY.
    Infancy must be specially replied to a plea of the act of limitations.
    Debt on a testamentary bond.
    Pleas—“Plene administravit; performance, and the act of limitations.” Replications and issues.
    The plff. offered to prove the infancy of Mrs. Abbott to rebut the plea of the statute of limitations, but it was objected to and insisted that he ought to have replied the infancy.
    
      Layton, for plff. Cullen, for deft.
   The Court

said that where a party relied on infancy to prevent the operation of the statute, he must reply it so as to give the other side notice.

The plff. suffered a nonsuit.