Legal Opinion
United States v. Northern Finance Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided January 10, 1927No. 156PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHand, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). We have been unable to see the significance of the defendant’s argument that the limitation in section 250 (d) is upon the right, and not upon the remedy, and that it “is jurisdictional in its character.” That the section is a statute of limitations appeal’s to us too plain for argument, and we are as much compelled to determine when the action is “begun,” if the limitation be upon the right, as if it be upon the remedy. As a statute of limitations it appears to us that it must be read as such statutes always have been, especially as we can see no…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Linn & Lane Timber Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- International Paper Co. v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
- Goldenberg v. MurphySupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Armstrong Cork Co. v. Merchants' Refrigerating Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1910
- United States v. American Lumber Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1898
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- United States v. HardyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1935
- Maier v. Independent Taxi Owner's Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
- Acheson Graphite Co. v. MellonDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1927
- Otto v. HirlDistrict Court, S.D. Iowa · 1950
- United States v. PalmerDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1927
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.