Dwyer v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"A general acknowledgment of an indebtedness may be CT Page 364 sufficient to remove the bar of the statute. The governing principle is this. The determination of whether a sufficient acknowledgment has been made depends upon proof that the defendant has by an express or implied recognition of the debt voluntarily renounced the protection of the statute. . . . But an implication of a promise to pay cannot arise if it appears that although the debt was directly acknowledged, this acknowledgment was accompanied by expressions which showed that the defendant did not intend to pay it, and did not intend to deprive himself of the right to rely on the Statute of Limitations." (Citations omitted.) Dwyer v. Harris , 128 Conn. 397 , 400 , 23 A.2d 147 (1941). "[A] general acknowledgment may be inferred from acquiescence as well as from silence, as where the existence of the debt has been asserted in the debtor's presence and he did not contradict the assertion." Potter v. Prudential Ins. Co. , 108 Conn. 271 , 281 , 142 A. 891 (1928).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Somma v. Fabian, No. Cv99 0174508 S (Jan. 6, 2003)

2. “The trial court should have told the jury that if they found the evidence established the defendant's claim that his promise was not to pay the debt created by the note but to assist in collecting from others the money paid ... such promise did not remove the bar of the Statute of Limitations.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 184 Conn. App. 650 - Ajluni v. Chainani