Guaranty Trust Co. v. York

326 U.S. 99 (1945)

What's Going On?

The Supreme Court granted certiorari to review a judgment holding that a federal court in a diversity action was not bound by a New York statute of limitations that would have barred the suit.

Who's Who?

Plaintiffs    :

York, et al – [class of] note holders alleging breach of trust by Defendant trustee.

Defendant :

Guaranty Trust Co. – bond trustee.

Facts:

Plaintiffs[, a class of note holders,] sued Defendant Guaranty Trust Co, a bond trustee, in a diversity action in federal court. Plaintiffs alleged breach of trust and misrepresentation by Defendant. [Summary judgment was granted to Defendant, and Plaintiff appealed. On appeal,] which was governed by New York substantive law, Defendant argued that the action was barred by the New York statute of limitations. Plaintiffs argued that the suit was in equity, and therefore the statute of limitations did not bar the suit because courts of equity were not strictly bound by statutes of limitation. The court, based on the reasoning set forth by Plaintiffs, found that the suit was not barred. [Defendant appealed.]

Issue:

When no recovery may be had in state court because the action is barred by the state statute of limitations, may a federal court, in equity, hearing the suit based on the diversity of citizenship between the parties refuse to apply the statute of limitations?

Decision:

No. Although legal authority considers the divide between matters of “substance” and “procedure” to be of great importance, it is immaterial whether statutes of limitation are considered to be substantive or procedural. Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins established that in all cases where a federal court is exercising jurisdiction based solely on diversity of citizenship of the parties, the outcome of the litigation in the federal court should be substantially the same as it would be if tried in a state court. A state statute must be enforced when it significantly affects the result of the litigation. [A state statute that would completely bar recovery, such as the statute of limitations in this case, significantly affects the result of the litigation. Consequences that so greatly affect recovery or non-recovery in a federal diversity case should follow state law. Therefore,] the judgment is reversed and the case is remanded.

Basic Rule:

A state statute of limitations must be enforced when it significantly affects the result of the litigation.

Terms:

Equity :

1. The body of law originating in the English Court of Chancery with the purpose of deciding cases according to principles of fairness where there is remedy available at common law. 2. Any right or remedy recognized by a court applying such principles.

Home  |  Briefs  |  Glossary  |  Contact Us