Smyth v. Peters Shoe Co.
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from, Linn District Court. — Hon. William Gr. Thompson, Jiidge. The petition filed by plaintiff on the twenty-fourth day of December, 1891, was aided by attachment, and recites that the Peters-Miller Shoe Company was, in the year 1891, a mercantile corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Missouri; that after the acts com plained of the Peters Shoe Company was incorporated in said state, and succeeded to the rights and business and…
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Linn District Court. — Hon. William Gr. Thompson, Jiidge. The petition filed by plaintiff on the twenty-fourth day of December, 1891, was aided by attachment, and recites that the Peters-Miller Shoe Company was, in the year 1891, a mercantile corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Missouri; that after the acts com plained of the Peters Shoe Company was incorporated in said state, and succeeded to the rights and business and assumed the liabilities of the first-named company. It is further charged that in March, 1891, the Peters-Miller Shoe Company…
1Opinion of the CourtWaterman, J.
1 We need consider but one of the several matters discussed, and that is the plea of the statute of limitations. The levy of the attachment was made on March 18, 1891. The sale was had April 24th of the same year, and this action was not begun until December 24, 1897. Under the statutes of the state of Missouri, where the cause of action arose, and where defendant resides, an action of this kind is barred in five years. Section 3452 of our Code provides: “When a cause of action has been fully barred by the laws of any country where the defendant has previously resided, such bar shall be the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Garrett v. Bicklin, Winzer & Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1889
- Lloyd v. PerrySupreme Court of Iowa · 1871
- Valley Bank of Clarinda v. Shenandoah National BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899
- Lebrecht v. WilcoxonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1874