Taylor v. . Spivey

Decided December 5, 1850

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1850-12-05

<p>Where to an action on a justice’s judgment the defendant pleads “the statute of limitations,' ’ the plaintiff cannot reply a new promise within the seven years. The replication of a new promise is confined to actions "on promises.”</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 1906

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1850-12-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Peabsoit, J.

¶1 This was a warrant on a former judgment of a single justice. The defendants relied on the statute of limitations. The plaintiffs in the replication alleged a' new promise within the seven years. His Honor correctly decided, that the statute could not thus be met. The replication of a new promise is confined to actions ‘on promises.” This is settled in this State and England.

¶2 The other instructions were uncalled for; at all events the plaintiffhas no right to complain of them.

¶3 Per Curiam, Judgment affirmed.