Cahn v. Reilly

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Cahn v. Reilly

113 N.Y.S. 545

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 16, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 113 N.Y.S. 545 (Cahn v. Reilly) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cahn v. Reilly, 113 N.Y.S. 545 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

FORD, J.

Plaintiff sues for the balance due on an account which was opened in 1882. ' The defendant is a fireman. The account stopped in 1886, when defendant’s connection with the fire department ceased. On his return to the department in 1898 he told plaintiff “to continue the account.” Plaintiff claims that on March 4, 1902, defendant paid him $3, and he relies on this payment to save the account from the bar of the statute of limitations. Plaintiff says the defendant "paid on account; that is all. He says: ‘There is $3 on account.’ ”

The burden was on the plaintiff .to show the payment, and that it was accompanied by circumstances amounting to an absolute and unqualified acknowledgment by the debtor of more being due, from which á promise may be inferred to pay the remainder. The plaintiff has not sustained this burden, and on the authority of Crow v. Gleason, 141 N. Y. 489, 36 N. E. 497, the judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

FORD, J.

Plaintiff sues for the balance due on an account which was opened in 1882. ' The defendant is a fireman. The account stopped in 1886, when defendant’s connection with the fire department ceased. On his return to the department in 1898 he told plaintiff “to continue the account.” Plaintiff claims that on March 4, 1902, defendant paid him $3, and he relies on this payment to save the account from the bar of the statute of limitations. Plaintiff says the defendant "paid on account; that is all. He says: ‘There is $3 on account.’ ”

The burden was on the plaintiff .to show the payment, and that it was accompanied by circumstances amounting to an absolute and unqualified acknowledgment by the debtor of more being due, from which á promise may be inferred to pay the remainder. The plaintiff has not sustained this burden, and on the authority of Crow v. Gleason, 141 N. Y. 489, 36 N. E. 497, the judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

113 N.Y.S. 545, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cahn-v-reilly-nyappterm-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack