Reed v. Frederick

Decided March 15, 1857

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1857-03-15

<p>In an action on a debt from which the debtor has received a certificate of discharge m insolvency, evidence of promises made before the commencement of the proceedings, to pay the debt notwithstanding, are inadmissible; and their admission is ground of exception, although accompanied by evidence of a subsequent promise, and “ only for the purpose of showing that the defendant would be likely to make the promise after he went into insolvency, and as showing that he considered it an honorary debt,” and although the jury are instructed that “ to entitle the plaintiff to recover, they must be satisfied that the defendant, after the commencement of the insolvency proceedings, unconditionally promised the plaintiff to pay his debt.”</p>

Decided 1857-03-15

Shaw, C. J.

¶1The plaintiff could recover only by proving an express promise after the debtor had obtained his discharge. Proof of a promise before the discharge was not competent for any purpose, and ought not to have been admitted. It is impossible now to say that the jury, in finding their verdict for the plaintiff, did not rest it on the proof of a promise before the z discharge was granted; or that there was sufficient evidence of a promise after the discharge to warrant the verdict.

¶2 Exceptions sustained.