Sanford v. Dick
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action of book debt. In the superior court, the cause was referred to auditors, who reported, that the defendant was, indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of 23 dollars, 11 cents, to balance book accounts. Against the acceptance of this report the defendant filed a remonstrance, stating the following facts.
Read the full summary
This was an action of book debt. In the superior court, the cause was referred to auditors, who reported, that the defendant was, indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of 23 dollars, 11 cents, to balance book accounts. Against the acceptance of this report the defendant filed a remonstrance, stating the following facts. On the hearing before the auditors, the plaintiff exhibited his account against the defendant, containing this charge, among others: “ 1837, March 2. For cash lent, $30.” The defendant objected to the allowance of this charge, on the ground that the cause of action did not…
1Opinion of the CourtHinman, J.
Whether the plaintiff’s charge for cash lent, was barred by the statute of limitations, depends upon whether this suit was commenced on the 28th day of February, 1843, when the officer attached real estate by virtue of the writ, or not until the 4th of March following, when the copy was left in service with the defendant. That it is the service of the writ, that, in this state, is the commencement of an action, and not the issuing of it, is well settled, and is not denied. But the question here is, what is the service, and when shall it be deemed to be so far completed, that the action may be…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Consolidated Motor Lines, Inc. v. M & M Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1941
- Tuohey v. MartinjakSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
- Young v. MargiottaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1950
- Copes v. MalacarneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1934
- Chestnut Point Realty, LLC v. Town of E. WindsorSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2017
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.