Russell v. Copp
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit upon a note made by the defendant, and dated 15th April, 1815, for $100, payable to David Copp, of whose estate the plaintiffs are administrators with the will annexed, on demand. Pleas, the general issue and the statute of limitations. The cause was tried here at August term, 1829, and a verdict taken for the defendant by consent, subject to the opinion of the court upon the following case.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit upon a note made by the defendant, and dated 15th April, 1815, for $100, payable to David Copp, of whose estate the plaintiffs are administrators with the will annexed, on demand. Pleas, the general issue and the statute of limitations. The cause was tried here at August term, 1829, and a verdict taken for the defendant by consent, subject to the opinion of the court upon the following case. David Copp, the payee of said note, in 1805, conveyed to the defendant a farm, for which the defendant, being the son of the said David, gave two notes ; and having made payment in part of said…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court.
The question in this case, is, whether it ought to have been submitted to a jury to infer a promise to pay from the admissions made by the defendants ? In the case of Bell v. Morrison, 1 Peters S. C. Reports, 362, Mr. Justice Story, says, “ if there be no express promise but a promise is to be raised by implication of law from the acknowledgment of the party, such acknowledgment ought to contain an unqualified and direct admission of a previous subsisting debt, which the party is liable and willing to pay, — if the expressions be equivocal, vague and indeterminate, leading to no…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Manning v. WheelerSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1843
- Ventris v. ShawSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1843