LegalFix

Section 52-590 - When defendant's absence from state to be excluded.

CT Gen Stat § 52-590 (2019) (N/A)
Copy with citation
Copy as parenthetical citation

In computing the time limited in the period of limitation prescribed under any provision of chapter 925 or this chapter, the time during which the party, against whom there may be any such cause of action, is without this state shall be excluded from the computation, except that the time so excluded shall not exceed seven years.

(1949 Rev., S. 8330; 1959, P.A. 429; 1963, P.A. 642, S. 87; P.A. 85-548, S. 4.)

History: 1959 act clarified language, specifying section applies to periods prescribed under chapter 925 or this chapter and limited time excluded to seven years; 1963 act included periods prescribed in section 52-435a; P.A. 85-548 deleted reference to Sec. 46b-160.

This applies, although both parties are and always have been nonresidents. 24 C. 442. A temporary absence is not within statute. 16 C. 113, 116; 105 C. 569. Ownership of attachable property in Connecticut does not give nonresident debtor the right to invoke the aid of our statute of limitation. 55 C. 577. One who occupied apartment in New York with his wife a considerable portion of the time held to be still a resident here. 92 C. 55. Periods during which defendant is within the state may be added together to form statutory period; domicile in another state does not prevent one from having a usual place of abode here; defendant may have two or more usual places of abode in two or more states; time excluded while out of the state covers only absences which prevent service of process in actions in personam. 105 C. 571. Statute runs against nonresident when he acquires a usual place of abode here; against a resident when he returns here. Id., 568. Not applicable to actions against nonresidents begun under Sec. 52-62. 116 C. 643. Cited. 131 C. 675; 225 C. 238.

Cited. 31 CA 569.

When “usual place of abode” is acquired. 7 CS 145. Cited. 17 CS 222; Id., 408. Statute of limitations should be raised by special defense so that plaintiff may, in reply, plead section. 18 CS 143. Where defendant had room at Yale University and was absent therefrom only during summer vacation, his absence did not toll statute of limitations under section. 27 CS 394. Cited. 40 CS 6; 42 CS 187.

LegalFix

Copyright ©2024 LegalFix. All rights reserved. LegalFix is not a law firm, is not licensed to practice law, and does not provide legal advice, services, or representation. The information on this website is an overview of the legal plans you can purchase—or that may be provided by your employer as an employee benefit or by your credit union or other membership group as a membership benefit.

LegalFix provides its members with easy access to affordable legal services through a network of independent law firms. LegalFix, its corporate entity, and its officers, directors, employees, agents, and contractors do not provide legal advice, services, or representation—directly or indirectly.

The articles and information on the site are not legal advice and should not be relied upon—they are for information purposes only. You should become a LegalFix member to get legal services from one of our network law firms.

You should not disclose confidential or potentially incriminating information to LegalFix—you should only communicate such information to your network law firm.

The benefits and legal services described in the LegalFix legal plans are not always available in all states or with all plans. See the legal plan Benefit Overview and the more comprehensive legal plan contract during checkout for coverage details in your state.

Use of this website, the purchase of legal plans, and access to the LegalFix networks of law firms are subject to the LegalFix Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

We have updated our Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, and Disclosures. By continuing to browse this site, you agree to our Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, and Disclosures.