Fitch v. Bill
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action to recover the contract price of certain real estate claimed to have been deeded to the defendant’s testar tor, brought to the Superior Court in New London County where the plaintiff, in a trial to the jury before George W. Wheeler, J., was nonsuited, and appealed from the refusal of the trial court to set aside such judgment.
Read the full summary
Action to recover the contract price of certain real estate claimed to have been deeded to the defendant’s testar tor, brought to the Superior Court in New London County where the plaintiff, in a trial to the jury before George W. Wheeler, J., was nonsuited, and appealed from the refusal of the trial court to set aside such judgment. Paragraphs 1, 3 and 12 of the complaint were as follows: “ 1. On March 13th, 1880, the defendant’s testator, the said Daniel S. Guile, then in full life, did purchase by deed all of the rights and titles that the said Ezra L. Guile had in or to the estate of his…
1Opinion of the CourtHall, J.
The two grounds stated in the finding upon which the Superior Court sustained the defendant’s motion for a nonsuit, are: first, that the right of action upon the alleged promise did not accrue within six years next before the death of Daniel Guile, and that therefore the plaintiff’s right to recover was defeated by the statute of limitations; and second, that .the transaction” between Ezra Guile and Daniel was illegal, since its purpose was to deprive the wife of Ezra of her right to alimony in the property conveyed.
To determine whether the statute of limitations is a bar to the action, it…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cook v. MorrisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1895
- Brown & Bros. v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1888
- Borough of Wallingford v. HallSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1894
3Cited by3 opinions
- Pignatario v. MeyersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1924
- Resnik v. MorgansternSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
- Baggish v. OffengandSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922