TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Kavanagh v. Folsom

Kavanagh v. Folsom, 181 F. 401 (1910)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · Historical Federal Courts
Decided
May 16, 1910
Judges
Noyes
Citations
181 F. 4011910 U.S. App. LEXIS 5582
Disposition
Sustained.
Headnotes
Limitation of Actions (§ 114*)—Suspension of Statute—Effect. Where a statute imposing a liability for wrongful death provides for suit to enforce the same within a specified time, such limitation operates on the liability, and not on the remedy alone; and hence suit must be brought within that time, regardless of other statutes suspending the operation of the statutes of limitation. [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Limitation of Actions, Cent. Dig. § 524; Dec. Dig. f 114.*]
Summary
At Law. Action by Mary R. Kavanagh, as administratrix, etc., against George W. Folsom, committee. Demurrer to complaint.

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

Opinion of the Court — Noyes

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

NOYES, Circuit Judge.

This is an action to recover damages for the death of the plaintiff’s intestate, based upon the New York statute permitting a recovery in such causes. It appears from the complaint that the action was not brought within the two years limited by such statute for the commerfcement of the action. The defendant demurs upon the ground that no cause of action is stated.

When a statute, like the one upon which the complaint is based, creates a liability provided the suit for its enforcement is brought within a prescribed time, the time fixed operates as a limitation of the liability itself, and not of the remedy alone. A condition of the right to sue at all is that the action be brought within the stated time. The statutory provision is not a mere statute of limitation, and consequently the provisions of other New York statutes suspending the operation of statutes of limitation are inapplicable. As this complaint fails to state that it was brought within the time prescribed by the statute upon which it is based, it fails to state a cause of action.

Demurrer sustained, with costs.

How later courts describe this case

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

1913: 11917: 21919: 11923: 11924: 11925: 11929: 11936: 119132026peak 1917 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. State ex rel. Stasciewicz v. Parks129 A. 793 (Md. 1925)
  2. Gengo v. Mardis170 N.W. 841 (Neb. 1919)
  3. Denver & R. G. R. v. United States241 F. 614 (8th Cir. 1917)
  4. The Princess Sophia35 F.2d 736 (W.D. Wash. 1929)
  5. Morrison v. Baltimore & O. R. Co.40 App. D.C. 391 (D.C. Cir. 1913)
  6. Colorado Fuel & Iron Co. v. Industrial Commission216 P. 706 (Colo. 1923)

Most recent

  1. In re Agwi Nav. Co.17 F. Supp. 973 (S.D.N.Y. 1936)
  2. The Princess Sophia35 F.2d 736 (W.D. Wash. 1929)
  3. State ex rel. Stasciewicz v. Parks129 A. 793 (Md. 1925)
  4. Cotton v. Wabash Railway Co.198 Iowa 535 (1924)
  5. Colorado Fuel & Iron Co. v. Industrial Commission216 P. 706 (Colo. 1923)
  6. Gengo v. Mardis170 N.W. 841 (Neb. 1919)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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