Tillet v. Linsey & Co.

29 Ky. 337, 6 J.J. Marsh. 337, 1831 Ky. LEXIS 187
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky
DecidedJune 27, 1831
StatusPublished

This text of 29 Ky. 337 (Tillet v. Linsey & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Tillet v. Linsey & Co., 29 Ky. 337, 6 J.J. Marsh. 337, 1831 Ky. LEXIS 187 (Ky. Ct. App. 1831).

Opinion

Chief Justice Robertson

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a suit on a merchant’s account, instituted more than twelve months after the date of the last item; and the only question presented to this court for consideration is, whether the plaintiff in error, who was defendant in the action, made any promise or acknowledgment within tbe year, which took the case out of the operation of the statue of limitations?

The only proof is, that the plaintiff, when asked whether or not tbe account against him was just, said that “it was, so far as he knew, that he had left it to the other party, and had kept no account himself,” but contended that the defendants “were indebted to , . ,,

This declaration cannot be construed as amounting either to an express promise to pay, or an express acknowledgment of indebtedness; founded on, and ferring to the original consideration. Wherefore, the verdict and judgment against the plaintiti, are not authorized by the evidence; consequently, the circuit court erred in ovverruling the .motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
29 Ky. 337, 6 J.J. Marsh. 337, 1831 Ky. LEXIS 187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tillet-v-linsey-co-kyctapp-1831.