Dean v. Pitts
New York Supreme Court
THIS was ail action of assumpsit, brought on two promissory notes made by the defendant and Sylvester Richmond, dated 5th November, 1793. The defendant pleaded non assumpit and the statute of limitations. .... On the trial, at the Rensselaer circuit, in 1811, it was proved, that about two years before, the defendant was shown the notes ánd called upon for payment.
Read the full summary
THIS was ail action of assumpsit, brought on two promissory notes made by the defendant and Sylvester Richmond, dated 5th November, 1793. The defendant pleaded non assumpit and the statute of limitations. .... On the trial, at the Rensselaer circuit, in 1811, it was proved, that about two years before, the defendant was shown the notes ánd called upon for payment. The defendant admitted that he. made the notes, and that they were given for an honest debt, but said 1,0 that they had been paid; that the defendant had sent the money to Richmond, and he supposed Richmond had paid the plaintiff;…
1Per curiam
The defendant admits the debt, and does not pretend he had paid it, hut supposed his partner Richmond had paid it, and he takes upon himself the'burden of proving it, for he said he thought he could make that appear. This was sufficient to take the case out of the statute, and to cast upon the defendant the necessity of proving payment; and though the court might have been induced to have looked with a very indulgent eye upon the proof of the payment which might have been produced, yet here ?!one was attempted to be produced. í
Motion denied.
2Cited by5 opinions
- Hill v. KendallSupreme Court of Vermont · 1853
- Glenn v. M'CulloughSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1824
- Taylor v. JacksonSuperior Court of Delaware · 1877
- White v. PotterSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1793
- White v. PotterSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1793