Black v. Holland
Supreme Court of Georgia
Appeal. Before Judge Reese. Hart superior court. March term, 1896. On December 11, 1895, J. Q. A. Black sued Holland et al.. upon a promissory note not under seal, dated June 2, 1874,. due December 25, 1874, and bearing unsigned credits for sundry amounts paid on December 7, 1880, February 13, 1886, January 25, 1890, and January 6, 1894. By way of amendment to the original summons in the justice’s court, plaintiff alleged that the note was not barred by the statute of…
Read the full summary
Appeal. Before Judge Reese. Hart superior court. March term, 1896. On December 11, 1895, J. Q. A. Black sued Holland et al.. upon a promissory note not under seal, dated June 2, 1874,. due December 25, 1874, and bearing unsigned credits for sundry amounts paid on December 7, 1880, February 13, 1886, January 25, 1890, and January 6, 1894. By way of amendment to the original summons in the justice’s court, plaintiff alleged that the note was not barred by the statute of limitations, for the reason that the credits or payments placed thereon were payments actually made to plaintiff, and were…
1Opinion of the CourtSimmons, C. J.
A credit on a promissory note, in order to constitute a new point from which the statute of limitations will commence to run, must be in writing and signed by the maker or by some one by him authorized ; or, if unsigned, such credit must be in the handwriting of the maker himself. An unsigned credit, written by an agent of the maker, will not suffice to renew the promise or to constitute a new point from which the. . statute will run. Watkins v. Harris, 83 Ga. 680.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concurring.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Watkins v. HarrisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1889
3Cited by3 opinions
- Moore v. MooreSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
- Murray v. BaldwinCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1943
- Brandon v. PritchettSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906