Efird v. . Sikes

Connor, J. The defendants offered no evidence at the trial of this action, but relied on their contention that it appeared from the evidence offered by the plaintiffs, that more than three years had elapsed since the cause of action accrued, and for that reason, the action was barred by the statute of limitations. C. S., 441(1). The evidence, however, showed that the defendants received the proceeds of the notes executed *562 by tbe plaintiffs, and delivered to them, as attorneys for the plaintiffs, and that the action was commenced within three years from the date on which the plaintiffs demanded a settlement. It is well settled that where a fiduciary relation exists between the parties, with respect to money due by one to the other, the statute of limitations does not begin to run until a demand and refusal. Egerton v. Logan, 81 N. C., 112. See McIntosh N. C. Prac. & Pro., p. 130, and cases cited in support of the text to that effect. There was error in the judgment. For that reason, the judgment is Reversed.