Summerside Bank v. Ramsey
| Decision Date | 08 June 1893 |
| Citation | 26 A. 837,55 N.J.L. 383 |
| Parties | SUMMERSIDE BANK v. RAMSEY et al. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
(Syllabus by the Court.)
This suit, brought by the Summerside Bank against Ramsey and others, was on a judgment obtained by the plaintiff against the defendants, in assumpsit, before the supreme court of the province of Prince Edward's Island, and dominion of Canada. The defense set up a plea that the demand was barred by the lapse of six years, under the statute of limitations of this state. This plea was demurred to. Judgment for defendants.
Argued February term, 1893. before BEASLEY, C. J., and DIXON and REED, JJ.
Vail & Ward, for plaintiff.
John W. Beekman, for defendants.
That a foreign judgment is subject to the statute of limitations prevalent by force of the lex fori has been established by a consensus of judicial opinion. By force of the federal constitution a judgment rendered in a state is as conclusive in the other states, with respect to the matters alleged, as it is at the place of its rendition. Such decisions are in all respects true records, and in this quality are to be discriminated from the adjudications made by foreign courts. With respect to this latterclass of judgments, Mr. Wood, in his treatise on Limitations of Actions, (page 80, § 30,) correctly says that they are to be reckoned as mere simple contract debts; and, to the like effect. Black, in his work on Judgments, (section 850,) observes "that such judgments are not records; for, as they possess no higher character than simple contract debts, it is obvious that they must be burred by the same period of limitations, which is that of the lex fori." Many other cases to the like effect are cited in the brief of the counsel of the defendants; but it is not necessary further to expound the subject, as it is entirely at rest. The defendants are entitled to judgment, etc.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Marshall v. Geo. M. Brewster & Son, Inc.
...90 N.J.L. 282, 286, 101 A. 254 (E. & A. 1917); Jaqui v. Benjamin, 80 N.J.L. 10, 11, 77 A. 468 (Sup.Ct.1910); Summerside Bank v. Ramsey, 55 N.J.L. 383, 384, 26 A. 837 (Sup.Ct.1893); McClellan v. F. A. North Co., 14 N.J.Misc. 760, 770, 187 A. 337 (Sup.Ct.1936); Leek v. Wieand, 2 N.J.Super. 33......
-
McClellan v. F. A. N. Co.
...upon contracts such as that here involved, the period of limitation prescribed by the law of the forum controls. Summerside Bank v. Ramsey, 55 N.J.Law, 383, 26 A. 837; Jaqui v. Benjamin, 80 N.J.Law, 10, 77 A. 468. In the present case it is unnecessary to determine whether an action in this ......
-
Department of Mental Health of Com. of Ky. v. Mullins
...13 N.J.Super. 23, 80 A.2d 123 (App.Div.1951), certification denied 7 N.J. 577, 83 A.2d 379 (1951) (but note Summerside Bank v. Ramsey, 55 N.J.L. 383, 26 A.837 (Sup.Ct.1893), holding for six-year limitations in action on judgment of foreign country), and plaintiff's preexisting right of acti......
-
Wright v. Kroydon Co.
...law of the state where such remedies are pursued, and not by the law of the state where the cause of action arose. Summerside Bank v. Ramsey, 55 N. J. Law, 383, 26 A. 837; Jaqul v. Benjamin, 80 N. J. Law, 10, 77 A. 468; Smith v. Smith, 90 N. J. Law, 282, 101 A. The case of Jaqui v. Benjamin......