Case ID: misc_125/html/0443-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Henry A. Ahrens, Respondent, v. Guaranty Trust Company of New York, Appellant.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    June 15, 1925.
    Limitation of actions — period of computation — statute deemed to have commenced to run within reasonable time for performance — date of commencement for jury.
    Where the Statute of limitations is deemed to commence to run within a reasonable time for performance by the defendant, that question is one for the jury.
    Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the City Court of the City of New York in favor of the plaintiff, entered upon the verdict of a jury. (See, also, 124 Misc. 402.)
    
      Stetson, Jennings, Russell & Davis [William C. Cannon of counsel], for the appellant.
    
      Rounds, Hatch, Dillingham & Debevoise [George M. Wolf son of counsel], for the respondent.
   Per Curiam:

We are of the opinion that as the case went to the jury, there was no clearly stated instruction upon the subject of the time when the Statute of Limitations commenced to run. As matter of law, the statute commenced to run upon the date fixable as the date upon which a reasonable time expired within which defendant should have performed. We are of the opinion that, because of the conditions then prevalent in Europe and then obtaining in over-seas transmission, the period of reasonableness of time was fixable by the jury as matter of fact.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Bijur, Mullan and Proskauer, JJ.