Troll v. Hanauer
Supreme Court of Vermont
General Assumpsit. Pleas, general issue and Statute of Limitations. Replication, bankruptcy, absence from the State, and that the cause of action accrued in another State. Heard by the court, on demurrer to the replication, September Term, 1883, Washington County, Ross, J., presiding. Demurrer sustained.
Read the full summary
General Assumpsit. Pleas, general issue and Statute of Limitations. Replication, bankruptcy, absence from the State, and that the cause of action accrued in another State. Heard by the court, on demurrer to the replication, September Term, 1883, Washington County, Ross, J., presiding. Demurrer sustained. The plaintiff by his specification claimed to recover on the ground that, in 1871, he had signed as surety a note with the defendant, and at his request; and that he, plaintiff, was compelled to pay it when it matured in 1872. The provisions of the present statute can only apply in cases…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Ross, J.
The contention is, whether the plaintiff’s repli*141cations are. either of them, a sufficient answer to the defendant’s special plea, setting up the Statute of Limitations, that the causes of action did not accrue within six years next before the bringing of the suit. The first replication avers, among other things, that the cause of action accrued to the plaintiff in the State of Ohio, where he then resided, and ever since has resided; and that the defendants then resided, and ever since have resided, in the State of Pennsylvania. This replication…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Merchants & Planters National Bank of Sherman v. AppleyardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- Marine Midland Bank v. BicknellSupreme Court of Vermont · 2004
- Trask v. KarrickSupreme Court of Vermont · 1920
- Wetmore's Admr. v. KarrickSupreme Court of Vermont · 1921
- Merchants & Planters National Bank of Sherman v. AppleyardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953