Stein v. Hamman
Texas Commission of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtSpeer, J.
Appellant has presented his motion for a rehearing accompanied by an able argument of counsel, stressing the point that we erred in indulging an implication of a promise to pay the barred debt, since there was, in evidence, an express refusal upon his part to renew the indebtedness.
In the first place, it will be seen the statute (Rev. Civ. Stat; art. 5539) only requires an acknowledgment of the justness of the claim to take the case out of the operation of the law, and, where there is such written acknowledgment, the law implies a promise to pay, and the legal effect of the acknowledgment is…
2Cited by14 opinions
- First National Bank in Canyon v. GambleTexas Supreme Court · 1939
- Starr v. FergusonTexas Supreme Court · 1942
- Beeler v. HarbourCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1938
- Poe v. PoeCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1938
- Shackelford v. NeilonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1936
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.