Sgambati v. United States
Decision Date | 03 February 1949 |
Docket Number | Docket 21194.,No. 142,142 |
Citation | 172 F.2d 297 |
Parties | SGAMBATI v. UNITED STATES. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Paul Kastenbaum, of New York City (Jacob Rassner and Jack Steinman, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
John F. X. McGohey, of New York City (Martin J. Norris, of New York City, of counsel), for appellee.
Before AUGUSTUS N. HAND, CLARK, and FRANK, Circuit Judges.
The only question here is whether the statute was tolled during the period of infancy. In Osbourne v. United States, 2 Cir., 164 F.2d 767, 768, we said: We see no reason to depart from that statement. The plaintiff could have sued by a next friend within the two years. New York Central & H. R. R. Co. v. Tonsellito, 244 U.S. 360, 37 S.Ct. 620, 61 L.Ed. 1194. The unusual ground for exception to the statutory period we found to exist in the Osbourne case (i. e., impossibility of access to the courts within the period) was absent here.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Glenn v. United States
...minority or other recognized legal disability. See: Sims v. Everhardt, 1880, 102 U.S. 300, 309, 310, 26 L.Ed. 87; cf. Sgambati v. United States, 2 Cir., 1949, 172 F.2d 297. At the very moment § 2501 became law, § 2401(a) and (b) likewise became law. The general equitable considerations agai......
-
Henry v. Richardson-Merrell, Inc.
...91 N.J.L. 220, 102 A. 673 (E. & A. 1917) (F.E.L.A.); Mann v. United States, 399 F.2d 672 (9 Cir. 1968) (F.T.C.A.); Sgambati v. United States, 172 F.2d 297 (2 Cir. 1949) (Jones Act). However, infant-plaintiff in this suit does base his cause of action upon a New Jersey statute which is tolle......
-
Pacific-Atlantic Steamship Company v. United States
...Co. v. United States, 272 U.S. 675, 47 S.Ct. 289, 71 L.Ed. 472; Osbourne v. United States, 2 Cir., 164 F.2d 767-768; Sgambati v. United States, 2 Cir., 172 F.2d 297-298; Crescitelli v. United States, 3 Cir., 159 F. 2d 377; Kruhmin v. United States, 3 Cir., 177 F.2d 906; Alcoa S. S. Co. v. U......
-
Crown Coat Front Co. v. United States
...to be brought within the time-bar period. McMahon v. United States, supra 342 U.S. 25, 72 S.Ct. 17, 96 L.Ed. 26 (1951); Sgambati v. United States, supra 172 F.2d 297, 298, cert. denied, 337 U.S. 938, 69 S.Ct. 1514, 93 L.Ed. 1743 (1949). "It therefore follows that despite any maritime contra......