Soulden v. Van Rensselaer
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit, tried at the Madison circuit in March, 1828, before the Hon. Nathan Williams, one of the circuit judges. The declaration was on a note dated 15th February, 1817, for 9600 weight of first quality potash, to be delivered half on ^he first day of July, and the residue on the first day of OcJ - mi . - . . , tober next after the date ot the note. 1 he defendant plead-e<^ non assumPs^ and non assumpsit infra sex annos.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, tried at the Madison circuit in March, 1828, before the Hon. Nathan Williams, one of the circuit judges. The declaration was on a note dated 15th February, 1817, for 9600 weight of first quality potash, to be delivered half on ^he first day of July, and the residue on the first day of OcJ - mi . - . . , tober next after the date ot the note. 1 he defendant plead-e<^ non assumPs^ and non assumpsit infra sex annos. The plain tiffs replied a new promise within six years before the commencement of the suit. On the trial of the cause, the plaintiffs proved an…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Marcy, J.
There is something anomalous in the pleadings in cases where the demand, after having been barred by the statute of limitations, or discharge under an insolvent law, is revived by an acknowledgment or a new *474promise. It is the new promise expressed or implied which entitles the plaintiff to recover, and the issue is generally upon that promise ; yet the declaration takes no notice of it. I ^e^eve there are no other instances in which the plaintiff can recover when the promise or undertaking on which the recovery rests is not introduced into his declaration. This anomaly…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Depuy v. SwartNew York Supreme Court · 1829
3Cited by7 opinions
- Sayles v. ChristieIllinois Supreme Court · 1900
- Sherman v. BarnesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1830
- Bank of Orange County v. HaightNew York Supreme Court · 1835
- Blair v. CaryWisconsin Supreme Court · 1859
- Bullard v. LopezNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1895
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.