Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!

Sign up free
Page thumbnail for Arkansas State Gazette
Domestic News April 24, 1844

Arkansas State Gazette

Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas

What is this article about?

The United States Court, with Judges P. V. Daniel and B. Johnson, ruled that a 1843 state act repealing the saving clause for out-of-state persons in limitation of actions is unconstitutional, as it impairs contract obligations by depriving plaintiffs of remedy. Argued by Trapnall and Watkins for plaintiffs, Fowler and Pike for defendants.

Clipping

OCR Quality

98% Excellent

Full Text

Important Decision. The United States Court now in session, present the Hon. P. V. Daniel, Judge, and the Hon. B. Johnson, Associate, have decided that the act of the General Assembly of the State entitled "An act concerning the limitation of actions." approved 14th January, 1843, which repealed the usual saving clause in favor of persons "beyond the limits of this State " is unconstitutional and void. The ground sustained by the Court, was, that the plaintiffs, having a subsisting right of action, the effect of the act in question, was to deprive them instantly of all remedy. The Court held, that such a law did not affect the remedy merely, but impaired the obligation of the contract itself. The cases were argued by Messrs. Trapnall and Watkins for the plaintiff, and Messrs. Fowler and Pike for the defendants.

What sub-type of article is it?

Legal Or Court

What keywords are associated?

Court Decision Unconstitutional Act Limitation Of Actions Contract Obligation State Assembly Act

What entities or persons were involved?

P. V. Daniel B. Johnson Trapnall Watkins Fowler Pike

Domestic News Details

Key Persons

P. V. Daniel B. Johnson Trapnall Watkins Fowler Pike

Outcome

the act is unconstitutional and void, as it impairs the obligation of the contract by depriving plaintiffs of remedy.

Event Details

The United States Court decided that the state act of January 14, 1843, entitled 'An act concerning the limitation of actions,' which repealed the saving clause for persons beyond the state limits, is unconstitutional. The court held that it deprives plaintiffs of remedy and impairs contract obligations. Cases argued by Trapnall and Watkins for plaintiffs, Fowler and Pike for defendants.

Are you sure?