Legal Opinion
Long v. . Oxford
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided September 5, 1889PublishedCited by 4 opinions
Statute Limitations — Costs — New Promise — Administration. This was a civil actioN, heard upon the report of referee before Shipp, J., at the July Term, 1889, of ALEXANDER Superior Court. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Clark, J.:
There are only two points taken by the defendant’s exceptions.
First Exception. — Does the paper writing of September 5; 1876, have the effect of removing the statutory bar interposed by the defendánt’s answer against the plaintiff’s right of recovery? The said writing is in the following words and figures, to-wit:
“Samuel Reed debtor to G. W. Long by book account for goods bought in 1859 up to the present date, amounting to two hundred and fifty dollars ($250) or upwards. I do this day acknowledge the debt, and will pay the same. This 5th day of September, 1876.
his
“SAMUEL + REED.
mark
“…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- McLeod v. . BullardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1881
- Justice v. National Bank of NewbernSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880
- Faison v. . BowdenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1877
3Cited by4 opinions
- Taylor v. . MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
- King Bros. Shoe Store Co. v. WisemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
- Long v. . OxfordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
- Futures Grp., Inc. v. BrosnanNorth Carolina Business Court · 2022