Sagory v. New York & New Haven Railroad

21 How. Pr. 455
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 15, 1861
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 21 How. Pr. 455 (Sagory v. New York & New Haven Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Sagory v. New York & New Haven Railroad, 21 How. Pr. 455 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1861).

Opinion

Barnard, Justice.

This is an action to recover of the defendants $31,000 and interest, damages sustained by the plaintiff by reason of the frauds of Schuyler, the defendants’ agent, for which frauds Judge Ingraham, at special term, decided that the defendants were to a certain extent liable.

The defendants put in an answer, which they now move to amend by adding the statute of limitations. To this the plaintiff objects that a foreign corporation cannot avail itself of the statute of limitations; that even if they could, the statute did not run, because of the injunction granted in the omnibus suit, and that the courts have uniformly refused to allow an amendment in order to plead the statute—the defence not being a favored one, but one which, if the party let slip, he will not be relieved.

[456]*456The defendants contend that no distinction should be made as to defences authorized by law, and that amendments for the purpose of setting up usury and the statute of limitations should be allowed as much as defences regarded as meritorious, and that the defendants were not a foreign corporation.

Motion denied with costs.

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

Related

Inhabitants of West Hoboken v. Syms
9 A. 780 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1887)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
21 How. Pr. 455, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sagory-v-new-york-new-haven-railroad-nysupct-1861.