Homer T. Barnett v. Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company

Sixth Circuit

Homer T. Barnett v. Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company

407 F.2d 1333, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 13215

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedMarch 18, 1969

Docket18484_1

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 407 F.2d 1333 (Homer T. Barnett v. Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Homer T. Barnett v. Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company, 407 F.2d 1333, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 13215 (6th Cir. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The sole issue presented on this appeal is whether the District Court erred in dismissing the action on the ground that it had not been commenced within the period provided by the applicable statute of limitations. Plaintiff-appellant does not contest the application of Kentucky Revised Statute 413.140(d), which provides that an action for slander must be commenced within one year of the occurrence giving rise to the action. .However, as the District Judge pointed out in the memorandum filed with the order of dismissal, plaintiff-appellant attempts to avoid the consequences of that statute by evidence purporting to establish that as a result of the slander alleged he has continuously been denied employment and that the wrong done to him has thus been continuous.

This contention fails to recognize the fact that it is the occurrence of the tort which marks the beginning of the running of the statute of limitations, and that the date or dates of consequential injuries is therefore immaterial. As this Court has previously pointed out, “If this were not true, then it would result that, in every case where damages resulting from a wrongful act are in their nature continuing, there would be no limitation upon the right of action, and the beneficent purpose of the statute to put a period to the right to sue would be defeated.” Northern *1334 Kentucky Tel. Co. v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 73 F.2d 333, 335, 97 A.L.R. 133 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 294 U.S. 719, 55 S.Ct. 546, 79 L.Ed. 1251 (1934).

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The sole issue presented on this appeal is whether the District Court erred in dismissing the action on the ground that it had not been commenced within the period provided by the applicable statute of limitations. Plaintiff-appellant does not contest the application of Kentucky Revised Statute 413.140(d), which provides that an action for slander must be commenced within one year of the occurrence giving rise to the action. .However, as the District Judge pointed out in the memorandum filed with the order of dismissal, plaintiff-appellant attempts to avoid the consequences of that statute by evidence purporting to establish that as a result of the slander alleged he has continuously been denied employment and that the wrong done to him has thus been continuous.

This contention fails to recognize the fact that it is the occurrence of the tort which marks the beginning of the running of the statute of limitations, and that the date or dates of consequential injuries is therefore immaterial. As this Court has previously pointed out, “If this were not true, then it would result that, in every case where damages resulting from a wrongful act are in their nature continuing, there would be no limitation upon the right of action, and the beneficent purpose of the statute to put a period to the right to sue would be defeated.” Northern *1334 Kentucky Tel. Co. v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 73 F.2d 333, 335, 97 A.L.R. 133 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 294 U.S. 719, 55 S.Ct. 546, 79 L.Ed. 1251 (1934).

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

407 F.2d 1333, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 13215, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/homer-t-barnett-v-louisville-and-nashville-railroad-company-ca6-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack