Young v. Ward

33 Me. 359
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided July 1, 1851·Published

Opinion

A promise by a debtor, made without legal consideration, that, before the pay-day of his debt arrives, he will make a partial payment, does not expedite the creditor’s right of action.

Neither wiE a partial payment in advance expedite the right of action for the balance.

Where a written instrument, intended as an agreement to be signed by both parties, shows that services were to be rendered by the plaintiff, for which he was to be paid at a future day, the term of credit is binding upon him, although the instrument was signed by himself only, if he admits the services to have been rendered under that agreement.

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

Young v. Ward, 33 Me. 359 (Me. 1851).

33 Me. 359 (Young v. Ward) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.