Jackson ex dem' Frost v. Horton
New York Supreme Court
EJECTMENT for lands ⅛ the county of WesUChesier. The declaration served, was captioned of August term, * ^ 1803, and the consent rule entered of the November term following.
Read the full summary
EJECTMENT for lands ⅛ the county of WesUChesier. The declaration served, was captioned of August term, * ^ 1803, and the consent rule entered of the November term following. At the trial, the defendant insisted, that the plaintiff was barfed from maintaining his action, by virtue óf the provisions of the law of the 28th of March, 1797", t Rev. Laws, 162, limiting to five years, the period for bringing claims and prosecutions against forfeited estates^ To do away the force of this objection, the plaintiff proved a suit by the present lessor, instituted on the lOchof June, 1801, against Abijak…
1Opinion of the Court
S&encer, J.
Upon the state of facts in this case, two questions arise. 1st. What is the effect of the statute of the 28 th of March, 1797, on suits instituted after the expiration of five years from its enactment ? 2d. Will the peculiar circumstances of this case exempt it from tire operation of that act ?
The first section of the statute † enacts, that no persons who have, or thereafter shall have, any estate to any lands, supposed to be forfeited to the people of the state, by the attainder or conviction of any person, for any act or crime done during the late war, and which had been…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Schermerhorn v. SchermerhornNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Huntington v. BrinckerhoffNew York Supreme Court · 1833