Case Name: Henry Lamott against William M'Laughlin
Court: General Court of Maryland
Jurisdiction: Maryland
Decision Date: 1793-05
Citations: 3 Md. 324
Docket Number: 
Parties: Henry Lamott against William M'Laughlin.
Judges: 
Reporter: Maryland reports, being a series of the most important law cases argued and determined in the Provincial Court and Court of Appeals of the then province of Maryland, from the year 1700 [i.e. 1658] down to the [end of 1799]
Volume: 3
Pages: 324–324

Head Matter:
GENERAL COURT,
MAY TERM, 1793.
Henry Lamott against William M'Laughlin.
THIS was an action of trespass vi et armis, for break» ing and entering the close of the plaintiff, &c.
The defendant pleaded the statute of limitations, but pleaded actio non accrevit infra duos annos, instead of actio non accrevit infra tres annos. The plea was de» murred to, and motion made for leave to amend.
M‘Mechen, for the defendant,
cited 3 Term Rep. 124, 2 Wils. 124. Salk. 452. 1 Sid. 21. 333. 1 Wils. 7. 149. 223. 256. Act of Assembly, 1785, c. 80. s. 4. 2 Stra. 734.
Hollingsworth, for the plaintiff,
cited 2 Term Rep. 390. 2 Wils. 253,

Opinion:
The Court,
on full deliberation and examination of the authorities, determined that as the plea of limitations was not a plea to the merits, it should not be received after the rule day, nor amended if pleaded defectively.
The Chief Justice said that 1 Bl. Rep. and Barnes's Notes, made the true distinction.