Earl v. Clark

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that, in a continuing tort, the burden of segregating successful damages arising before and after the commencement of the five-year limitations period falls on the defendant
• holding the statute of limitations is an affirmative defense and the burden of proving the defense is on the pleader
• “This court has held the statute of limitations is an affirmative defense and the burden of proof is upon the pleader.”
• “It is inceptionally understood we are concerned here with a temporary nuisance subject to abatement for which injunctive relief and damages may be had.”
• “If the [statute of limitations] defense is partial only, barring only a part of the damage, defendant has the burden of proving what part of the damage occurred before the running of the limitation period.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).