Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 6.djvu/495

 DOTY ». JOiBtNSON. ' 4:83 �fitatute of limitations does not rnn while there is no pereon against whom suit can be brought, as where, until adminio- tration bas been granted, a-statute of limitations does not operate upon a clairn against the estate, because, thore is no one who can be sued. Lewis v. Broadwell, 8 Moliean, 568. �Assuming, however, that Johnson's co-assignees could have maintained an action against him for the demand while he was assignee, his representatives are estopped from avail- ing themselves of the defenee. He was a trustee whose duty required him to enforce ail claims existing in favor of the estate. He was responsible for any default of bis co-assignees in tbis behalf, and could no more take advantage of their laches or misconduct than he could of his own misconduct in failing to bring an action that should have been brought. His administrators cannot avail themselves of a defenee whioh he would not have been permitted to set up. This action was not brought until three yeara and over had expired after the administrators were appointed. I am constrained to hold that the statute of limitations began to run when the administrators were appointed and had qualiued, and that the action is therefore barred. �The statutes of this state enact that the term of eighteen months after the death of any intestate shall not be deemed any part of the time limited by law for the commencement of actions against his administrators, and the plaintiffs insist that the period of eighteen months is notto be computed in applying the limitation. The answer to this argument is that the state statute does not prevent the bringing of an action against the administrators within the eighteen months. If it did in terme do this, the prohibition could not afifeet the right of a plaintiflf to bring a suit, which the laws of congress authorize him to bring at any time. The laws of the United States are supreme within their constitutional limits, and a right which they confer cannot be abrogated or curtailed by state legislation. The bankrupt act, as a measure of policy to secure the speedy settlement of estates, authorizes a de- fendant to defeat an action if it is not brought within two years. No state could deprive him of this right, and^'thus ��� �