Tompkins v. Hazen
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal from trial term, Putnam county. .Action by Mary E. Tompkins against Byron E. Hazen. Verdict for the plaintiff, and from a judgment entered thereon the defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtHatch, J.
In the case of Dusenbury v. Hoyt, 53 N. Y. 521, it was settled that, while the legal obligation to pay a debt was extinguished by a discharge in bankruptcy, the moral obligation to pay remained, and that this obligation, when united with a subsequent promise to pay the debt, gave a right of action. It was also held in that case that a plea upon the original debt was a good plea, and that no reply was needed in order to prove the new promise, in avoidance of a plea setting up the discharge in bankruptcy. This has been the established rule.since. Argall v. Jacobs, 21 Hun, 114; Graham v. O’Hern,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Allen & Co. v. FergusonSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Wakeman v. . ShermanNew York Court of Appeals · 1853
- Lawrence v. . HarringtonNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Dusenbury v. . HoytNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Sherman v. HobartSupreme Court of Vermont · 1853
3Cited by1 opinion
- Smith v. StanchfieldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901