Institution for Savings in the Town of Cambridge v. Littlefield
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This action was brought by the plaintiffs, as the indorsees, against the defendant, as the maker, of a promissory note for $1000, dated September 20th, 1839, and payable to James Greenwood or order, in two years from date, with interest semi-annually.
Read the full summary
This action was brought by the plaintiffs, as the indorsees, against the defendant, as the maker, of a promissory note for $1000, dated September 20th, 1839, and payable to James Greenwood or order, in two years from date, with interest semi-annually. The defendant relied, in defence, on a discharge in bankruptcy, under the bankrupt act of the United States, by a certificate dated the 28th of February, 1843. To entitle themselves to recover, notwithstanding the discharge, the plaintiffs relied on the facts stated in evidence by John B. Dana, their treasurer, who testified as follows: — That…
1Opinion of the CourtDewey, J.
To the defence of a discharge under the bankrupt law, the plaintiff replies 1st. That the defendant has made a subsequent promise to pay the debt. As to this, the only evidence of any new promise is that arising from the payments, by the defendant, on the note, of interest that had accrued since the discharge. Such payment was said by lord Mansfield, in the case of Alsop v. Brown, 1 Doug. 192, to revive the contract. No other authority is relied upon by the plaintiff to sustain this position. In principle, it has been directly overruled in the case of Merriam v. Bayley, 1 Cush. 77, where it…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Rood v. JonesMichigan Supreme Court · 1843
- Walbridge v. HarroonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1846
3Cited by1 opinion
- Needham v. MatthewsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1909