Legal Opinion · Dissent

Albachten v. Bradley

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 8, 1942No. 33,102Published

1DissentJulius J. Olson, Justice

The problem here is well stated by the court in a memorandum attached to its order granting a new trial:

“The motion for a directed verdict for the defendant was granted on the ground that the statute of limitations could not be tolled by the parties except by 'some writing signed by the party to be charged thereby,’ and no such writing was proved by the plaintiff. If that were all that is involved here, the motion for a new trial would be denied.
“The holding now is that a defendant may be estopped to plead the statute by an oral promise, made before the statute has run, not to plead it, and…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Shapley v. . AbbottNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
  2. Lively v. TaborSupreme Court of Missouri · 1937
  3. Olson v. DahlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  4. Olson v. MyrlandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
  5. In Re Estate of WalkerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API