Green v. Seymour
Supreme Court of Vermont
GENERAL Assumpsit. Heard on demurrer to the plaintiff’s replication to the plea of the Statute of Limitations, April Term, 1886, Royce, Ch. J., presiding. Judgment sustaining the demurrer and adjudging the replication insufficient. Plea that the causes of action did not accrue within six years, etc. Replication: “For replication, etc.
Read the full summary
GENERAL Assumpsit. Heard on demurrer to the plaintiff’s replication to the plea of the Statute of Limitations, April Term, 1886, Royce, Ch. J., presiding. Judgment sustaining the demurrer and adjudging the replication insufficient. Plea that the causes of action did not accrue within six years, etc. Replication: “For replication, etc. Because they say that prior to the commencement of this suit, to wit: on the first day of August, 1881, it was mutually agreed and understood' by and between the said’ plaintiffs and the said defendant for sufficient consideration then and there stated and…
1Opinion of the Court
*461The opinion of the court was delivered by
Ross, J.
The demurrer to the replication raises but two questions in regard to its sufficiency ; first, whether a sufficient consideration for the defendant’s agreement to waive the Statute of Limitations is set forth; and, secondly, whether it is necessary to allege that such agreement is in writing, signed by the defendant. The question of the duplicity of the replication is not assigned as a special cause of demurrer. It cannot be raised by a general demurrer, except to pleas- in abatement. 1 Chitty Pl. 650; Walker v. Sargeant, 14 Vt. 247. As said in…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Walker v. SargeantSupreme Court of Vermont · 1842
- Carpenter v. McClureSupreme Court of Vermont · 1864
- Hotchkiss v. C. J. Ladd & Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1864
- Patrick v. AdamsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1857
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bridges v. StephensSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896