Kavanagh v. Folsom

181 F. 401, 1910 U.S. App. LEXIS 5582
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York·Decided May 16, 1910·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

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.

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

Kavanagh v. Folsom, 181 F. 401, 1910 U.S. App. LEXIS 5582 (circtsdny 1910).

181 F. 401 (Kavanagh v. Folsom) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Agwi Nav. Co.
17 F. Supp. 973 (S.D. New York, 1936)
The Princess Sophia
35 F.2d 736 (W.D. Washington, 1929)
State Ex Rel. Stasciewicz v. Parks
129 A. 793 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1925)
Cotton v. Wabash Railway Co.
198 Iowa 535 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1924)
Colorado Fuel & Iron Co. v. Industrial Commission
216 P. 706 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1923)
Gengo v. Mardis
170 N.W. 841 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1919)
Alvarado v. Southern Pac. Co.
193 S.W. 1108 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1917)
Denver & R. G. R. v. United States
241 F. 614 (Eighth Circuit, 1917)
Morrison v. Baltimore & O. R. Co.
40 App. D.C. 391 (D.C. Circuit, 1913)