Legal Opinion

McNamee v. Tenny

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 2, 1864PublishedCited by 4 opinions

ACTION upon a promissory note made by the defendant, on the 21st of March, 1854, for $540.43, payable to the order of McNamee, Goodrich & Co., six months after date, with interest, of which the plaintiff was the holder. The answer set up the defense of the statute of limitations. To rebut this defense, by proving an acknowledgment of the debt within six years, the plaintiff offered in evidence several letters from the defendant, addressed to him.

Read the full summary

ACTION upon a promissory note made by the defendant, on the 21st of March, 1854, for $540.43, payable to the order of McNamee, Goodrich & Co., six months after date, with interest, of which the plaintiff was the holder. The answer set up the defense of the statute of limitations. To rebut this defense, by proving an acknowledgment of the debt within six years, the plaintiff offered in evidence several letters from the defendant, addressed to him. The defendant’s counsel objected to them severally as evidence, and to their being read in evidence, on the grounds that the same were irrelevant…

1Opinion of the CourtLeonard, J.

The acknowledgment need not express any intention to pay. An intention to pay is to be presumed. It is of very little consequence what was the intention of the debtor in this respect. If he acknowledges the existence of the debt, in writing, the provisions of the law are met, and the statute of limitations has not attached. In the absence of proof that other demands existed to which the acknowledgment of the defendant might apply, the presumption is that it applied to the demand proven. (Davenport v. Gilbert, 6 Bosw. 180.) The evidence adduced removed the uncertainty or doubt, if any existed,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Winchell v. . HicksNew York Court of Appeals · 1859

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. In re LorillardCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1901
  2. Cudd v. JonesNew York Supreme Court · 1892
  3. De Freest v. WarnerNew York Supreme Court · 1883
  4. Fiske v. HibbardThe Superior Court of New York City · 1879

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API