Railway v. Shoecraft
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Monroe Circuit Court. M. T. Sanders, Judge. Shoecraft in March, 1885, sued defendant railway company for killing his stock in September, 1883. The statute provides that such suits shall be brought within twelve months after the killing occurred. Mansf.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Monroe Circuit Court. M. T. Sanders, Judge. Shoecraft in March, 1885, sued defendant railway company for killing his stock in September, 1883. The statute provides that such suits shall be brought within twelve months after the killing occurred. Mansf. Dig., sec. 5340. Sec. 4497, Mansfield’s Digest, provides: “If any action shall be commenced within the times respectively provided in this act, and the plaintiff therein suffer a non-suit * * * such plaintiff may commence a new action, from time to time, within one year after such non-suit suffered.” Section 5544, Mansfield’s…
1Per curiam
statute of limitations- Bur-proof-The complaint in this cause was filed, March 7, 1885. The answer pleading statute of was filed April 2, 1885. The complaint was amended September 18, 1885, by alleging that suit was brought on this cause of action November 13, 1883, and dismissed April 9, 1884. The amended answer filed March 20, 1888, denied the bringing and dismissal of the previous suit. There was no proof on the point, and the court should have instructed the jury that upon the evidence the action was barred by the statute.
ragligengence, how relotted. Upon the facts the proof was wholly…
2Cited by11 opinions
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railroad v. LandersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1900
- St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co. v. HarmonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
- Culberhouse v. HawthorneSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
- Watkins v. MartinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1901
- Corbett v. Great Northern Railway Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.