Brooks v. Rudolph
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Dissent
Dissenting Opinion by
Mb. Justice Musmanno:
The promissory notes in this case are dated October 8, 1929, and judgments thereon were not entered until July 30,1931. This means that nothing was done to effectuate payment-until 21 years and 7 months after the date of the notes and 19 years and 2% months after the entry of judgment. This fact in itself, when suit on the notes is resisted, should be enough to prevent summary execution.
The dust of time and the cobwebs of delay work against the presumption of survival of a debt.
The defendant, Mary A. Russell, avers that the notes were paid to Alice A.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Peabody v. CarrSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- Diamond v. TobiasSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1849
- Hummel v. LillySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Hess v. FrankenfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884