Branch Bank at Decatur v. Hawkins
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit Court of Lauderdale. Assumpsit by the plaintiff in error, on a promissory note of the defendant’s intestate. Plea of the statute of non-claim.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Lauderdale. Assumpsit by the plaintiff in error, on a promissory note of the defendant’s intestate. Plea of the statute of non-claim. Upon the trial, as appears from a bill of exceptions, the plaintiff having failed to make presentation of the claim as the law requires, introduced evidence of a promise by the defendant, after the expiration of the period, within which it should have been presented, and thereupon the court charged the jury, that if they believed from the evidence, that the defendant had promised to pay the debt to the plaintiff, after the…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
The decision of the court below, is attempted to be sustained in this court, on the supposed analogy between the statute of non claim, and the general statute of limitations. It is true, that the former is, in effect, a statute of limitations, as the omission to make presentation of claims, as required by law, in the language of the act, forever bars their recovery ; but it by no means follows, that the analogy is complete. To prevent the bar of the statute of non-claim, the law requires an act to be done by the creditor, for which the promise of the administrator to pay the debt, cannot be…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Fretwell v. McLemoreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
- Pharis v. LeachmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1852
- McDowell v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
- Halfman's v. Ellison & SonsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1874
- Allen v. ElliottSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.