Burroughs v. Bloomer
New York Supreme Court
Error to the common pleas of the city and county of New-York. Bloomer, plaintiff in the court below, declared upon an account for goods sold and delivered. The defendant below pleaded 1. Non-assumpsit; 2. Non-assumpsit infra sex anuos, and 3. Actio non accrevit infra, &c.
Read the full summary
Error to the common pleas of the city and county of New-York. Bloomer, plaintiff in the court below, declared upon an account for goods sold and delivered. The defendant below pleaded 1. Non-assumpsit; 2. Non-assumpsit infra sex anuos, and 3. Actio non accrevit infra, &c. To the second and third pleas, the plaintiff replied that within six years after the making of the promise and the accruing of the cause of action, the defendant removed out of the state to reside, and had ever since resided without the state, and that since the cause of action accrued he had not resided six years within the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, McKissock, J.
The case piust be determined on the exceptions to the refusal of the judge to pharge the jpry as requested, and to the charge as ipadp. The defendant’s counsel requested the jpdgq to chapgp the jury thaf the visiting the city of New-York by the defendant as testified to by the witnesses was a re{prn tq the state within the meaning of the 27th section qf the statute of limitations; (2 R. S. 297;) and that it was sp frequent and constant that there was no period of absence to be deducted from the time United fqr bringing the actiqp, wbiph the. judge declined to do.…
2Cited by25 opinions
- Barney v. OelrichsSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Connecticut Trust & Safe Deposit Co. v. WeadNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
- Mack v. MendelsNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Campbell v. WhiteMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
- Penfield v. Chesapeake, Ohio & South Western RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.