Legal Opinion

DeRaismes v. DeRaismes

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided November 9, 1903PublishedCited by 7 opinions

On rule to show cause.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Gummeke, Chief Justice.

The plaintiff brought this action to recover the amount due on an interest-bearing promissory note, made by the defendant, dated May 22d, 1896, for the sum of $2,500, and payable to the order of the plaintiff, on demand. The ’action was begun in June, 1902, more than’ six years after the date of the note. The defendant pleaded non assumpsit infra sex annos. At the trial the plaintiff attempted to overcome the defence of the statute of limitations by showing a promise to pay the amount due on the note, made by the defendant less…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Adams v. FieldSupreme Court of Vermont · 1849
  2. Rigg v. WiltonIllinois Supreme Court · 1851
  3. Merritt v. . ToddNew York Court of Appeals · 1861
  4. Langdon v. ApplegateIndiana Supreme Court · 1854
  5. State ex rel. Fritts v. KuhlSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1889

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Wallis v. BoslerWyoming Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Rickenbach v. Noecker Shipbuilding Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1961
  3. Denville Amusement Co., Inc. v. FogelsonNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1964
  4. Renault v. L. N. Renault & Sons, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1950
  5. In re the Estate of HydeNew York Surrogate's Court · 1941

2 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