Patten v. Ray

Decided July 15, 1854

California Supreme Court · decided 1854-07-15

<p>1Limitations, Action on Eobeisn Judgment. — A foreign judgment is not “a contract, obligation or liability for the payment of money, founded on an instrument of writing executed out of this State,” within the meaning of the Statute of Limitations.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently April 1904

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1854-07-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Mr. Ch. J. Murray

¶1delivered the opinion of the Court.

Mr. J. Heydeneeldt concurred.

¶2The Court below properly decided that a foreign judgment was not * ‘ a contract, obligation or liability for the payment of money, founded on an instrument of writing executed out of this S tate, ” within tho meaning of the Statute of Limitations. We have already decided at this Term † that the Act of ’52 does not alter the time, as provided in the Act of ’50, for commencing suits upon this class of liabilities.

¶3Judgment affirmed with costs.

¶4Cavender v. Guild, ante, 250.