Potter v. Lefebvre

66 A.2d 643, 95 N.H. 482, 1949 N.H. LEXIS 201
Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided June 7, 1949·No. No. 3818.·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The ruling of the Trial Court was correct. The law upon this point is correctly stated in the Restatement, Conflict of Laws, s. 603, as follows: “If action is barred by the statute of limitations of the forum, no action can be maintained though action is not barred in the state where the cause of action arose.” See also, Connecticut &c. Co. v. Railroad, 78 N. H. 553, 555. The order, therefore, is

Exceptions overruled.

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

Potter v. Lefebvre, 66 A.2d 643, 95 N.H. 482, 1949 N.H. LEXIS 201 (N.H. 1949).

66 A.2d 643 (Potter v. Lefebvre) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith v. Morbark Industries, Inc.
733 F. Supp. 484 (D. New Hampshire, 1990)
Le Witt v. Warner Bros. Pictures Distributing Corp.
158 F. Supp. 307 (D. New Hampshire, 1957)