State Hospital for the Insane v. Philadelphia County

Citations

• 205 Pa. 336
• 54 A. 1032
• 1903 Pa. LEXIS 573

Syllabus

<p>Statute of limitations — Set-off—Assumpsit.</p> <p>Where the statute of limitations may be successfully set up against a claim sought to be enforced in an action of assumpsit, it may also be set up against the same claim when it is sought to be used as a set-off.</p> <p>Statute of limitations — Trust—State hospital for insane.</p> <p>Where a county pays money to the trustees of a state hospital for the insane, and the money is applied to the use of the hospital, and the county subsequently alleges that the payment was made by mistake on the part of the county, and by reason of the fraudulent concealment of the facts by the trustees, the county must institute its action to recover the money within six years, or otherwise be barred by the statute. In such a case the money continues to belong to the county, and is not held by the trustees for public purposes.</p> <p>Statute of limitations — Fraud—State hospital for insane — Acts of June 13, 1883, F. L. 92 and May 21, 1889, P. L. 258.</p> <p>The officers of the 'state hospital for the insane for the southeastern district of Pennsylvania between the years 1885 and 1889, submitted to the county of Philadelphia bills for the maintenance of indigent insane, based on a construction of the act of 1883, made by themselves. These bills were paid. After the passage of the act of 1889, the bills were made out strictly in accordance with the latter act, and were rendered for each quarter without reference to any prior quarter. The bill had attached to it a certificate and affidavit stating that no part of the amount due for the quarter named in the bill had been paid, and that there was no deduction or set-off against it to which the county was entitled to a credit. In a suit by the hospital against the county brought more than six years after 1889, the county endeavored to set off overpayments alleged to have been made by reason of the wrongful construction of the act of 1883. The county claimed the certificate and affidavit a