TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Snyder v. Hitchcock

Henry M. Snyder v. Henry W. Hitchcock

Snyder v. Hitchcock, 54 N.W. 43 (Mich. 1892)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Michigan Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
December 23, 1892
Judges
Montgomery, Other
Citations
54 N.W. 4394 Mich. 3131892 Mich. LEXIS 1122
Disposition
Keversed.
Headnotes
Statute of limitations — Action upon judgment — Assumpsit. 'Under How. Stat. § 8736, an action of assumpsit may be brought upon a circuit court judgment at any time within 10 years after its entry.
Summary
Error to Ionia. (Smith, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error. • The facts are stated in the opinion.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Montgomery

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Montgomery, J.

This is an action of assumpsit upon . a judgment rendered in the circuit court June 25, 1881. The declaration by which the suit was commenced was filed June 13, 1891. The defendant interposed a plea of the statute of limitations. On the trial the court directed .a judgment in favor of the defendant, on the ground that *314 the action, being in assumpsit, was'barred by the statute.

The only question to be determined is whether the general statute of limitations relating to actions of assumpsit controls, or whether a special statute of limitations exists, applicable to all actions brought upon judgment.

The general statute of limitations (section 8713) provides, that—

“ The following actions shall be commenced within six years next after the cause of action shall accrae, and not. afterwards; that is to say:

“1. All actions of debt founded upon any contract or liability not under seal, except such as are brought upon the judgment or decree of some court of record of the> United States, or of this or some other of the United States.

“ 2. All actions upon judgments rendered in any' court, other than those above excepted; ******

“4. All actions of assumpsit or upon the case, founded upon any contract or liability, express or implied.”

Section 8719 provides:

“All personal actions on any contract, not limited by the foregoing sections, or by any law of this State, shall be brought within ten years after the accruing of the-cause of action, and not afterwards.”

Section 8736 provides:

“Every action upon a judgment or decree heretofore rendered, or hereafter to be rendered, in a court of record of the United States or of this State, or of any otheu state of the United States, shall be brought within ten years after the entry of the judgment or decree, and not, afterwards.”

It is contended by defendant's counsel that as the present action is in assumpsit, the provision of the section first above quoted — that all actions of assumpsit or upon the-case, founded upon any contract or liability, express or-implied, must be brought within six years — controls. It, has been held in numerous cases by this Court that the form of action governs in determining whether section. *315 8719 or section 8713 applies in fixing the period of limitation. Sigler v. Platt, 16 Mich. 206 ; Goodrich v. Leland, 18 Id. 110; Christy v. Farlin, 49 Id. 319; Sherwood v. Landon, 57 Id. 219; Avery v. Miller, 81 Id. 85. But in none of these cases was the action upon a judgment, and there was no provision of the statute which fixed the term of limitation except the provision which depends upon the form of action. By section 8736, however, the term of limitation is fixed in every action upon a judgment or decree, without reference to the form of action chosen. It seems to me altogether clear that under this section the action was in time, and that the plaintiff is entitled to recover.

The judgment should be reversed, with costs, and a new trial ordered.

The other Justices concurred.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1897: 11913: 118972026peak 1897 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Sweetser v. Fox134 P. 599 (Utah 1913)
  2. Field v. Loveridge72 N.W. 160 (Mich. 1897)

Most recent

  1. Sweetser v. Fox134 P. 599 (Utah 1913)
  2. Field v. Loveridge72 N.W. 160 (Mich. 1897)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Sigler v. Platt, 16 Mich. 206 (1867) 3

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list