Farnham v. Thomas
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit for a quantity of bar track iron. Pleas, general issue and statute of Limitations. Replication that defendant had been out of the State. Trial by court, September Term, 1883, Yeazey, J., presiding. Judgment for the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit for a quantity of bar track iron. Pleas, general issue and statute of Limitations. Replication that defendant had been out of the State. Trial by court, September Term, 1883, Yeazey, J., presiding. Judgment for the plaintiff. It appeared that the defendant took the iron in 1868; that he left the State in 1875, more than six years after taking the iron, but less than six years after the promise to pay for it; that he had no fraudulent purpose in taking it, but took it as one neighbor feels at liberty to take a tool from another in his absence without express permission — a sort of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Taft, J.
The defendant, without leave, took the plaintiff’s iron in 1868 ; in the following year he promised to pay for it. The statute began to run on the promise at the time it was made ; by no ingenious reasoning can it be held to have commenced running earlier; the claim, therefore, was not barred at the time the defendant left the State.
The defendant, to avoid the effect of his absence from the State, insists that he had known property within it, which might have been attached by the common and ordinary process ©f law. The exceptions show that he…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Wheeler v. BrewerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1848
- Tucker v. WellsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1840
3Cited by3 opinions
- The Title & Document Restoration Co. v. KerriganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Gill v. MoreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
- Wall v. FooteDistrict Court, S.D. Alabama · 1925