Calloway v. Baldwin

1 White & W. 313
Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided November 18, 1882·No. No. 1397, Op. Book No. 3, p. 589·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Hurt, J.

§ 591. Limitation; verbal promise to pay a barred debt will not defeat the statute of. A verbal promise to pay a debt barred by the statute of limitation will not defeat a plea of the statute of limitation. To have this effect, such a promise must be in writing. [R. S. 3219.]

§ 593. Bankruptcy; verbal promise to pay debt discharged by, is valid. A verbal promise to pay a debt which has been discharged in bankruptcy, made by the bankrupt after his discharge, is a valid promise, and can be enforced. [4 Rawle, 452; 14 Johnson, 178; 12 N. Y. 637; 3 Am. Rep. 135-138; 3 Am. Dec. 45; 27 Am. Dec. 454; 13 Am. Rep. 543; 61 Mass. 482; 8 Humph. 510; 28 Miss. 702; 16 Ala. 261.]

§ 593. Bankruptcy ivill suspend limitation, when, etc. If a creditor filed his claim with the register in bankruptcy, this would suspend limitation during the pend-ency of the bankruptcy, but where he did not so file his claim, the bankrupt proceeding did not interrupt the running of limitation. [Wofford v. Unger, 53 Tex. 634.]

Reversed and remanded.

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

Calloway v. Baldwin, 1 White & W. 313 (Tex. Ct. App. 1882).

1 White & W. 313 (Calloway v. Baldwin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wofford v. Philip
53 Tex. 634 (Texas Supreme Court, 1880)
Earnest v. Parke
4 Rawle 452 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1834)
Belcher v. Smith
61 Mass. 482 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1851)
Herndon v. Givens
16 Ala. 261 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1849)
David La Tourrette v. Price
28 Miss. 702 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1855)