Foringer v. Sisson

Citations

• 14 Pa. Super. 266
• 1900 Pa. Super. LEXIS 45

Syllabus

<p>Statute of limitations — Sufficiency of acknowledgment to toll statute.</p> <p>The rule undoubtedly is that, to toll the running of the statute, the acknowledgment must not only be clear, distinct and unequivocal of the existence of a debt, but that it must plainly be referable to the very debt upon which the action is based. It matters not where the uncertainty lies, whether in the acknowledgment or in the identification, its existence is equally fatal to the plaintiff’s recovery.</p> <p>Any language inconsistent with a present intention to pay the debt is inconsistent with the theory of a new promise operating to toll the statute.</p> <p>Incidence — Parly dead — Administrator as witness.</p> <p>The administrator of a deceased defendant who as such is a party to the record is not an incompetent witness and the fact that he acted as the attorney of defendant does not make him incompetent when the testimony he proposed to give did not consist of confidential communications made to him by his client.</p>