Benvenute v. Voorhees

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Benvenute v. Voorhees

146 A. 677, 7 N.J. Misc. 580, 1929 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 233

DecidedJune 21, 1929

StatusPublished

This text of 146 A. 677 (Benvenute v. Voorhees) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Benvenute v. Voorhees, 146 A. 677, 7 N.J. Misc. 580, 1929 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 233 (N.J. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is a suit against an executor. The proofs in the District Court showed that someone had seen the plaintiff loan to the defendant’s testator money which he told others he had borrowed. The plaintiff testified that the money had not been repaid, and was still due and payable.

The proofs further consisted of letters from the testator, in which he admitted that he owed the plaintiff money which would be repaid. These letters were necessary to take the case out of the six-year period of limitation.

It seems to us that the action of the trial judge in giving judgment for the plaintiff did not offend either the Evidence act or the statute of limitations.

The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

This is a suit against an executor. The proofs in the District Court showed that someone had seen the plaintiff loan to the defendant’s testator money which he told others he had borrowed. The plaintiff testified that the money had not been repaid, and was still due and payable.

The proofs further consisted of letters from the testator, in which he admitted that he owed the plaintiff money which would be repaid. These letters were necessary to take the case out of the six-year period of limitation.

It seems to us that the action of the trial judge in giving judgment for the plaintiff did not offend either the Evidence act or the statute of limitations.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

146 A. 677, 7 N.J. Misc. 580, 1929 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 233, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/benvenute-v-voorhees-nj-1929.