Fiske v. Inhabitants of Needham
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action of the case upon sundry promises, one of the counts in the declaration be'ng upon an account annexed to the writ, and all of them for the same items and demands, of a di i more than six years before the commencement of the suit. The defendants pleaded the general issue, that they never pro.-iised, and also on the statute of limitations, that they never promised within six years before the action brought.
Read the full summary
This was an action of the case upon sundry promises, one of the counts in the declaration be'ng upon an account annexed to the writ, and all of them for the same items and demands, of a di i more than six years before the commencement of the suit. The defendants pleaded the general issue, that they never pro.-iised, and also on the statute of limitations, that they never promised within six years before the action brought. The general issue was joined by the plaintiff; and to the plea upon the statute of limitations he replied promises within six years, upon which issue was also joined by the…
1Opinion of the CourtJackson, J.
It having been long settled that an acknowledgment of a debt within six years before the action brought, will prevent the operation of the statute of limitations, such a contract not being within the intent of the statute, we have now * to [ * 454 ] determine whether the vote of the defendants, produced in evidence in this case, contains such an acknowledgment. If it do not, if it would have been the duty of the judge to instruct the jury on this evidence to find a verdict for the defendants, and if we should have set aside a verdict returned contrary to such direction, as being unsupported…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Lord v. ShalerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1819
- De Forest v. HuntSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1830