Legal Opinion

Hayden v. . Pierce

New York Court of Appeals

Decided January 29, 1895PublishedCited by 57 opinions

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered upon an order made September 12, 1893, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and also affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion.

Read the full summary

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered upon an order made September 12, 1893, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and also affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The plaintiff’s action is barred by the short Statute of Limitations contained in section 1822 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Code Civ. Pro. §§ 398, 414, 1596, 2628; R. R. Co. v. Chamberlain, 52 How. Pr. 23; In re Comrs., 50 N. Y.…

1Opinion of the CourtO’Bbien, J.

This was an action upon a written instrument in the nature of a promissory note for $1,000, bearing date January 23, 1882, made by Eliza W. Brown, the defendant’s testatrix, to the plaintiff, payable on or before one year after the death of the maker, with interest. The instrument, upon its face, states that its consideration was services rendered by the plaintiff to the deceased since the year 1864 to date, and to be rendered from that time until the death of the maker, whenever that event should occur. The maker died in January, 1890, leaving a will, in which the defendant, then and ever…

2Cited by57 opinions

  1. Sharrow v. . Inland Lines, Ltd.New York Court of Appeals · 1915
  2. Hamilton v. Royal Insurance Co. of Liverpool, EnglandNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
  3. Jewish Hospital v. DoeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937
  4. Brookshire v. BurkhartSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
  5. Titus v. . PooleNew York Court of Appeals · 1895

52 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