Huntington v. Heirs of Bobbitt

Citations

• 46 Miss. 528

Syllabus

<p>1. Statute• cot dimitations — estate cot decedent. — An administrator has no authority to make a promise to save the bar of the statute of limitations, as to a debt of his intestate, not barred at the time of his promise, and such promise by an administrator is not binding on the estate, nor on him personally, and will not prevent the completion of the bar by the continued running of the statute of limitations.</p> <p>2. Same — same — case in judgment. — Where a note secured by mortgage on land was not barred, when the administrator of the maker, who had died, promised in writing, as such administrator, to pay said - note on or before the 1st January, 1868, and the payee waited until after the 1st January, 1868, at which time the bar of the statute of limitations had become complete, but for the promise of the administrator, and filed his bill against the heirs of the intestate to foreclose his mortgage: Held, that the note was barred by the statute of limitations, and was not saved by the promise of the administrator; and as the note was barred, the mortgage could not be enforced.'</p> <p>3. Case cited and disappboved.- — The case of Byrd v. Wells; 40 Miss. 711, cited and disapproved.</p>