Boynton v. Moulton

34 N.E. 361, 159 Mass. 248, 1893 Mass. LEXIS 133
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided May 22, 1893·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Lathrop, J.

In August or September, 1888, the debt due from the defendant to the plaintiff on an account having become barred by the statute of limitations, Pub. Sts. c. 197, § 1, the defendant, a,t the request of the plaintiff, wrote upon the account, “ Dec. 1, 1888, will pay on. this bill such amount as I can,” and signed the writing. This is not an unqualified acknowledgment of the debt, from which a promise to pay may be inferred. Custy v. Donlan, ante, 245. It is merely a promise to pay, on a certain day, such an amount as the defendant then could pay. The judge has found that the defendant on that day was able to pay nothing. The plaintiff can claim only what the promise gave him. The ruling of the court below that the evidence was not sufficient to entitle the plaintiff to recover was clearly right. Bidwell v. Rogers, 10 Allen, 438. Bethell v. Bethell, 34 Ch. D. 561. Exceptions overruled.

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

Boynton v. Moulton, 34 N.E. 361, 159 Mass. 248, 1893 Mass. LEXIS 133 (Mass. 1893).

34 N.E. 361 (Boynton v. Moulton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Doyle v. Zanleoni
9 Mass. App. Div. 168 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1944)
Sherman v. Sidman
14 N.E.2d 145 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1938)
Gill v. Gibson
114 N.E. 198 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1916)
Koop v. Cook
135 P. 317 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1913)
Van Buskirk v. Kuhns
129 P. 587 (California Supreme Court, 1913)
Gillingham v. Brown
178 Mass. 417 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1901)
Keenan v. Keenan
37 A. 532 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1897)
Glidden v. Chamberlin
46 N.E. 103 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1897)