Huffman v. Johns

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Huffman v. Johns

6 A. 205, 3 Sadler 469, 1886 Pa. LEXIS 776

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedOctober 18, 1886

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 6 A. 205 (Huffman v. Johns) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Huffman v. Johns, 6 A. 205, 3 Sadler 469, 1886 Pa. LEXIS 776 (Pa. 1886).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

In order to restore the legal efficacy of a debt discharged by proceedings in bankruptcy, the promise to pay must, undoubtedly, be unambiguous and explicit. But in the case in hand, as the jury has found, there was not only an absolute and unconditional promise by the defendant to pay the note in controversy, but also a partial payment. Than this there could be nothing more unequivocal, and it fully and in every particular complies with the rule for the revival of the discharged debt.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curiam:

In order to restore the legal efficacy of a debt discharged by proceedings in bankruptcy, the promise to pay must, undoubtedly, be unambiguous and explicit. But in the case in hand, as the jury has found, there was not only an absolute and unconditional promise by the defendant to pay the note in controversy, but also a partial payment. Than this there could be nothing more unequivocal, and it fully and in every particular complies with the rule for the revival of the discharged debt.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 A. 205, 3 Sadler 469, 1886 Pa. LEXIS 776, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/huffman-v-johns-pa-1886.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack