Boyce v. Lake

Citations

• 17 S.C. 481
• 1882 S.C. LEXIS 89

Syllabus

<p>1. In action on a note the answer alleged that the plaintiff was a lunatic; at the trial plaintiff’s attorneys admitted this allegation and moved, without previous notice, for the appointment of a guardian ad litem, for the plaintiff, and .the appointment was made. Held, that the amendment was within the discretion of the presiding judge, and this discretion was properly exercised.</p> <p>2. It is only when the defendant so fully admits the plaintiff’s case as to entitle plaintiff, in the absence of affirmative defence, to his judgment, that the defendant is entitled to open and reply.</p> <p>3. The lapse of twenty years raises a presumption of payment as to sealed notes and bonds, which, though not a presumption of law, is a presumption of fact that has acquired an artificial force subject to be rebutted by such facts only as would revive an unsealed note barred by the statute of limitations. There must be in rebuttal something more than mere belief deduced from the weight of testimony; the stay law, the war and the lunacy of plaintiff are not circumstances sufficient to rebut this presumption.</p>