Williams v. American Surety Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtWorrill, J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) 1. “Under the statute of frauds, any promise to revive a debt barred by a statute of limitation must be in writing and signed by the promissor or some person lawfully authorized by him. Code § 20-401 (6). This without more would require that the debt be identified, and that the new promise or acknowledgment should itself furnish the identification, or afford the means therefor. Gartrell v. Linn, 79 Ga. 700 (2) (4 S. E. 918); Slack v. Sexton, 113 Ga. 617 (38 S. E. 946); Duke v. Lynch, 56 Ga. App. 331 (192 S. E. 535). But, as in a contract for the sale of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Swint v. SwintSupreme Court of Georgia · 1917
- Gartrell v. LinnSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
- Smith v. Federal Land BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1935
- Martin v. MayerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1940
- Middlebrooks v. CabanissSupreme Court of Georgia · 1942
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- R. H. Macey & Co. v. ChanceyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967