Legal Opinion

Dupuis v. Woodward

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided April 26, 1952No. 4110PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBlandin, J.

It is agreed that the only question before us is whether the plaintiff’s right of action is barred by art. 2262 of the Civil Code of the Province of Quebec which reads as follows: “2262 . . . The following actions are prescribed by one year: ... 2. For bodily injuries, saving the special provisions contained in article 1056 and cases regulated by special laws.” It is undisputed that the present action does not fall under art. 1056 or any special laws mentioned above. As bearing on the interpretation of the provision in question, art. 2267 of the Civil Code provides: “2267. In all the cases…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Osborne v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1913
  2. Tarbell v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1920

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Marshall v. Geo. M. Brewster & Son, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1962
  2. Kathy Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1982
  3. Gordon v. GordonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1978
  4. Howard G. Dindo v. Harold O. WhitneyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1970
  5. Smith v. Morbark Industries, Inc.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 1990

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