General
Knight versus Reese
2 U.S. 1822 Dall. 182·Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·1792·PA
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Knight versus Reese.
CHARLES KNIGHT, father of the plaintiff, put out £200 at interest, to be divided among his four children, at their mother’s death. The defendant was one of the trustees named in the bond, and had received the money on the widow’s decease. The only question was, whether interest should be paid from the time he received it.
[MAJORITY — By the Court:]
By the Court:
—Interest is not to be a mere trustee, for the money which he holds for the use of another, unless he neglects to pay it on demand. As there is no proof of demand in this case, it must be calculated only from the commencement of the action.