Lambert v. Doyle

43 S.E. 416, 117 Ga. 81, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 157
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 7, 1903
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 43 S.E. 416 (Lambert v. Doyle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lambert v. Doyle, 43 S.E. 416, 117 Ga. 81, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 157 (Ga. 1903).

Opinion

X.AMAR, J.

1. In a suit on an account, to which the plea of the statute of limitations has been filed, a letter from the defendant to the attorney of the plaintiff, stating, “It will be absolutely impossible for me to give you anything before after the 1st of June. I will send you check for something then. . . Hope to be able to clear your acct. quick,” is not sufficient to relieve the bar of the statute of limitations.

2. The written acknowledgment or new promise to pay must clearly and distinctly identify the particular account, note, demand, or chose in action to be renewed, and there must also be therein either an express promise to pay the claim, or such an absolute and unqualified admission of it asan existing indebtedness that the law would imply a promise to pay the same. Kelly v. ' Strouse, 116 Ga. 872.

3. Where a plea of the statute of limitations is filed, and the defendant, though not represented at the trial, within due time presents a bill of exceptions containing a correct statement of the evidence, and assigns as error that the court directed a verdict for the plaintiff, a new trial will be ordered when it appears that the account sued on was in fact barred, and had not been revived by a new promise or written acknowledgment. Kelly v. Strouse, 116 Ga. 872. Judgment reversed.

By five Justices.

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

Related

Cleveland Lumber Company v. Proctor & Schwartz, Inc.
397 F. Supp. 1088 (N.D. Georgia, 1975)
Martin v. Mayer
11 S.E.2d 218 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1940)
Sinclair Refining Co. v. Scott
2 S.E.2d 755 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1939)
In re Sanders
20 F. Supp. 98 (N.D. Georgia, 1937)
Duke v. Lynch
192 S.E. 535 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1937)
Thompson v. Bank of Buckhead
163 S.E. 255 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1932)
Stanfield v. Hursey
136 S.E. 826 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
43 S.E. 416, 117 Ga. 81, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 157, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lambert-v-doyle-ga-1903.