Legal Opinion

Salisbury v. Bennett

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Decided March 10, 1896PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.

This is a motion for leave to amend the answer by setting up the statute of limitations. The action is for libel, and the limitation is two years. Code Civ. Proc. N. Y. § 384. The defense was not interposed when the answer was served, for the reason that, under the decisions of the state courts *744as they then stood, defendant’s counsel assumed that it was a defense which he could not establish. The recent decision of the state court of appeals in Hart v. Kip, 148 N. Y. 806, 42 N. E. 712, reversing same case, 74 Hun, 412, 26 N. Y. Supp. 522, and construing section 401 of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Indianapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. HorstSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  2. Hart v. . KipNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
  3. Hart v. KipNew York Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Arnold v. ChesebroughU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern New York · 1887

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Gubbins v. LaughtenschlagerU.S. Circuit Court for the Southern District of Iowa · 1896
  2. N. & G. Taylor Co. v. AndersonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API