Waldon v. Haines & Dobinbish

Cal. District Court

Waldon v. Haines & Dobinbish

1 Cal. Dist. Ct. 155

DecidedJuly 15, 1857

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Cal. Dist. Ct. 155 (Waldon v. Haines & Dobinbish) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California District Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Waldon v. Haines & Dobinbish, 1 Cal. Dist. Ct. 155 (Cal. Super. Ct. 1857).

Pincite

Opinion

Hester, J.

held that a mere endorsement of payment appearing upon the note, uncorroborated by evidence, was not sufficient to prevent the Statute of Limitations from attaching. Held, also, that if the payment was in fact made at the time of the endorsement of credit, the partnership then continuing, such payment was an implied admission of the debt, and the Statute of Limitations was no bar to its recovery.

Held, also, that if the note was a partnership note, and the said endorsement to revive the debt was made by Haines, in the name of the firm, the partnership still then continuing, such endorsement took.the case out of the operation of the Statute ; but if the partnership had then ceased to exist, the endorsement by Haines did not create or continue- the liability of Dobinbish.

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

Hester, J.

held that a mere endorsement of payment appearing upon the note, uncorroborated by evidence, was not sufficient to prevent the Statute of Limitations from attaching. Held, also, that if the payment was in fact made at the time of the endorsement of credit, the partnership then continuing, such payment was an implied admission of the debt, and the Statute of Limitations was no bar to its recovery.

Held, also, that if the note was a partnership note, and the said endorsement to revive the debt was made by Haines, in the name of the firm, the partnership still then continuing, such endorsement took.the case out of the operation of the Statute ; but if the partnership had then ceased to exist, the endorsement by Haines did not create or continue- the liability of Dobinbish.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Cal. Dist. Ct. 155, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/waldon-v-haines-dobinbish-caldistct-1857.