Hill v. Ringgold

HATCHER, PRESIDENT:

This action involves the effect on the statute of limitations, of a new promise in writing by defendant to pay a stale-account. The trial court held the promise ineffective and plaintiff secured a writ of error.

Plaintiff mailed defendant the following statement of the account on November 28, 1927: “To amount of bill rendered $952.26. Please remit.” The defendant replied on the statement itself: “If you will send me an itemized bill I will pay it promptly. (Signed) R. C. Ringgold.” An. itemized statement was mailed to defendant by plaintiff on July 6, 1928. This delay is not…