Burton v. Robinson
This text of 1 Del. 260 (Burton v. Robinson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
[266]*266 The Court,
charged the jury: In the opinion of the Court, nothing short of a direct acknow[267]*267lodgment, or a distinct admission of the existence of the debt ás a subsisting demand, is sufficient to take the case [268]*268out of the operation of the statute of limitations; but if they were satisfied that the written agreement which had been given in evidence-between the plaintiff, as the administrator of Miers Burton, deceased, and the defendant, was signed by the latter, then the Court considered it such an acknowledgment of a subsisting, demand on the promissory note in question, as would remove the bar of the statute.
ttoTlfi.—Houston, J., did not sit in this case, having been of counsel for the defendant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 Del. 260, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burton-v-robinson-delsuperct-1856.