Cleaveland v. Dinsmore
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit upon a promissory note. Pleas, general issue and Statute of Limitations. Heard on a referee’s report, September Term, 1885, Royce, Ch. J., presiding. Judgment for the defendant. The case appears in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Powers, J.
The vital question in the case is whether the 4th or 5th endorsements upon the note in suit express valid payments thereon so to bar the running of the Statute of Limitations.
An endorsement standing alone is not under our statute suf*437ficient proof of an actual payment. But affirmative proof may be adduced which will verify it as a valid payment and remove the bar.
The evidence tended to show that both endorsements covered voluntary payments by the defendant upon the note, but the referee does not say whether they were such or not. This is a…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Van Dyke v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1911
- Putnam v. SwainSupreme Court of Vermont · 1929
- Austin v. McClureSupreme Court of Vermont · 1888
- Bennett v. DelphiaSupreme Court of Vermont · 1925