Spalding v. Butts
Supreme Court of Connecticut
IN ERROR. This was an action of account in favour of Mary Spalding, against the defendants, as administrators of the estate of Samuel Barstow, deceased, stating, that said Samuel Barstow was, by the county court of Windham county, in August, 1785, appointed conservator of the estate of the plaintiff; and that he thereupon received of her the sum of 590 dollars in money, together with sundry articles of household furniture and wearing apparel, which he used and occupied, and…
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. This was an action of account in favour of Mary Spalding, against the defendants, as administrators of the estate of Samuel Barstow, deceased, stating, that said Samuel Barstow was, by the county court of Windham county, in August, 1785, appointed conservator of the estate of the plaintiff; and that he thereupon received of her the sum of 590 dollars in money, together with sundry articles of household furniture and wearing apparel, which he used and occupied, and made great profit thereby, and undertook to render his reasonable account thereof to the plaintiff. The defendants…
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, J.
Two questions arise in this case. 1. Was this action commenced within six months after notice that the claim was disallowed ? 2. Does the action previously commenced prevent the effect of the statute ?
1. The time when an action is said to be commenced, varies according to the course of the court. In the English Common Pleas, it is the original writ. In the King’s Bench, it may be the suing out of the latitat, or the filing of the bill. A latitat avoids the statute of limitations; but it must be continued until the time of trial. A discontinuance leaves the statute in force. Foster v. Bonner,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Jencks v. PhelpsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1822
- Clark v. SamuelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1793
3Cited by19 opinions
- Lacasse v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- McGaffin v. RobertsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- Consolidated Motor Lines, Inc. v. M & M Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1941
- Valley Cable Vision, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1978
- Broderick v. JackmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1974
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.