Mazozon v. Foot
Supreme Court of Vermont
THIS was a motion for a new trial, founded upon the following CASE STATED. This was an action of debt, on judgment; plea, the statute of limitations; replication, that the defendant was out of the state; rejoinder, that the defendant came and returned within the state, &c. surrejoinder, traversing the last plea of the defendant.
Read the full summary
THIS was a motion for a new trial, founded upon the following CASE STATED. This was an action of debt, on judgment; plea, the statute of limitations; replication, that the defendant was out of the state; rejoinder, that the defendant came and returned within the state, &c. surrejoinder, traversing the last plea of the defendant. The judgment declared on, was rendered by the Court of common pleas of the county of Franklin, in the state of New-York, at their May term, A. D. 1811, for $,100,90, debt and costs. The present action was commenced Feb. ¿1st, 1823. The plaintiffs resided in Cornwall,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was pronounced by
Skinner, Ch. J.
In this case, we are called upon to give a construction to that part of the 10th section of the statute of limitations, which excepts from its operation, actions against debt-: ors absent from the state at the time the cause of action accrues, and by which, “after such absent person’s coming or return within this state,” the same time is limited for bringing the action, as in other cases. The case shows, that at the time the cause of action accrued, the defendant was a resident in the state of New-York, and the plaintiffs in this state;…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Davis v. FieldSupreme Court of Vermont · 1884
- Hill v. BellowsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1843
- Rixford v. MillerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1877
- Hall v. NasmithSupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
- Dunning v. ChamberlinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1834
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.