Kenney v. Brown

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Kenney v. Brown

1 N.E. 547, 139 Mass. 345, 1885 Mass. LEXIS 101

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedMay 8, 1885

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 1 N.E. 547 (Kenney v. Brown) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kenney v. Brown, 1 N.E. 547, 139 Mass. 345, 1885 Mass. LEXIS 101 (Mass. 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

Morton, C. J.

The letters of the defendant to the plaintiff’s intestate set forth in the bill of exceptions are not sufficient evidence of a new contract which deprives the defendant of the benefit of his discharge in insolvency. They refer to his insolvency, express his desire to pay all his debts, and his hope and trust that he will be able to pay the debt of the plaintiff’s intestate in the future, speak of partial payments, and express regret that he is not able to do more ; but they do not contain language which amounts to a clear and unequivocal promise to pay the whole debt, or an undertaking which is inconsistent with a reliance upon his discharge. The cases of Elwell v. Cumner, 136 Mass. 102, and Bigelow v. Norris, ante, 12, are decisive of the case at bar. Exceptions overruled.

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

Morton, C. J.

The letters of the defendant to the plaintiff’s intestate set forth in the bill of exceptions are not sufficient evidence of a new contract which deprives the defendant of the benefit of his discharge in insolvency. They refer to his insolvency, express his desire to pay all his debts, and his hope and trust that he will be able to pay the debt of the plaintiff’s intestate in the future, speak of partial payments, and express regret that he is not able to do more ; but they do not contain language which amounts to a clear and unequivocal promise to pay the whole debt, or an undertaking which is inconsistent with a reliance upon his discharge. The cases of Elwell v. Cumner, 136 Mass. 102, and Bigelow v. Norris, ante, 12, are decisive of the case at bar. Exceptions overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 N.E. 547, 139 Mass. 345, 1885 Mass. LEXIS 101, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kenney-v-brown-mass-1885.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack