Frost v. Eastern Railroad
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Case, for personal injuries from the alleged negligence of the defendants in not properly guarding and securing a turn-table. The plaintiff, who sues by his father and next friend, was seven years old when the accident occurred, June 23, 1877, and the action was commenced June 7, 1884. Plea, the general issue and statute of limitations. A motion for a nonsuit was denied, and the defendants excepted. Verdict for the plaintiff. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.
The action is not barred by the statute of limitations. “Any infant, married woman, or insane person may bring any personal actions within two years after such disability is removed.” G. L., c. 221, s. 7.
As a general rule, in cases where a disability exists when the right of action accrues, the statute does not run during the continuance of the disability, and it has not commenced to run against the plaintiff. Pierce v. Dustin, 24 N. H. 417 ; Little v. Downing, 37 N. H. 356. It is said that the plaintiff's next friend was under no disability, that he could have brought the action at any time…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Railroad Co. v. StoutSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Severy v. NickersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
- Nolan v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1885
- Pierce v. WhitcombSupreme Court of Vermont · 1875
- Gavin v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1880
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Dobbins v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1897
- Ouellette v. BlanchardSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1976
- City of Shawnee v. CheekSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Ryan v. TowarMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
- Twist v. Winona & St. Peter RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.