Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1840

Brown v. Bridges

Brown v. Bridges
Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas · Decided September 8, 1840
2 Miles 424

Counsel

Lex, for plaintiff., Badger, for defendant.

Brown v. Bridges

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.—

An acknowledgment of a debt, to prevent the operation of the statute of limitations, must, at least, be consistent with a promise to pay.! This is the law in Pennsylvania. 'The acknowledgment in defendant’s petition for the benefit of the insolvent laws is not of this character, for the very basis on which an insolvent asks his discharge is that he is unable to pay *426Ins debts. How this can be tortured into a promise to pay, or as being consistent with such a promise, we are at á loss to discover.

Judgment for defendant.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.