Trzecki v. Gruenwald
Missouri Supreme Court
532 S.W.2d 209 (1976)

- Written by Mary Phelan D'Isa, JD
Facts
Trzecki (plaintiff) sued Gruenwald (defendant) in a Missouri state court for injuries Trzecki sustained in Illinois when a car in which he and Gruenwald had been travelling was being towed after it broke down. Both Trzecki and Gruenwald were Missouri residents. The Illinois limitations period was two years: the Missouri limitations period was five years. Illinois had a guest statute barring personal-injury claims by passengers against drivers unless the injuries were caused by the driver’s wanton or willful misconduct. Missouri had a borrowing statute that provided that the law of the state where the cause of action originated applies in personal-injury cases. The trial court dismissed Trzecki’s claim as time-barred under the Illinois two-year limitations period. The appellate court agreed with Trzecki and reversed the dismissal. Gruenwald appealed. Trzecki argued that the Missouri borrowing statute did not apply and did not require application of the Illinois two-year limitations period because his claim did not originate under Illinois law because Trzecki did not allege that Gruenwald acted with willful or wanton conduct and, therefore, Trzecki’s claim originated under Missouri common law and the Missouri five-year limitations period applied. Alternatively, Trzecki argued that the Missouri borrowing statute should apply in cases involving nonresidents.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Holman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.