Huntington v. Brinckerhoff
New York Supreme Court
Statute of limitations. The plaintiff declared in assumpsit for monies had and received, paid, laid out and expended, lent and advanced, and on an account stated, laying the day in each count on 1st January, 1828, in the life-time of the intestate, and stating the promises to the intestate.
Read the full summary
Statute of limitations. The plaintiff declared in assumpsit for monies had and received, paid, laid out and expended, lent and advanced, and on an account stated, laying the day in each count on 1st January, 1828, in the life-time of the intestate, and stating the promises to the intestate. The defendant pleaded, 1. Non assumpsit; 2. That the several causes of action in the declaration mentioned did not accrue to Peter Thalhimer, the intestate, within six years before the commencement of the suit of the plaintiff, and that the suit of the plaintiff was not commenced within one year after the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Nelson, J.
The pleadings in this cause seem to have been framed in reference to the provisions of the revised statutes in relation to the statute of limitations, and the abatement of suits by the death of plaintiffs, 2 R. S. 296$ § 26; 299, § 35; 448, § 9 ; but these provisions can have no influence on this case, and we must decide the questions arising upon the pleadings according to the law as it existed previous to those statutes going into effect. 2 R. S. 300, §45.
Previous to the enactment above referred to, 2 R. S. 299, § 35, there was no statute in this state giving to the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Jackson ex dem' Frost v. HortonNew York Supreme Court · 1805
3Cited by9 opinions
- Life Ass'n of America v. GoodeTexas Supreme Court · 1888
- Wenman v. Mohawk InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1835
- People v. DaltonNew York Supreme Court · 1836
- Eyck v. WingMichigan Supreme Court · 1848
- Dillon v. Whatcom CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1895
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.