Maxwell v. Devalinger

Citations

• 18 Del. 504
• 2 Penne. 504
• 47 A. 381
• 1900 Del. LEXIS 21

Syllabus

<p>Foreign Attachment—Bill of Particulars— Variance—Evidence— Payment; Presumption of—Statute of Frauds; Construction of—Judgment; Lien of—Statute—Constitution.</p> <p>1. The object of a bill of particulars is to give reasonable notice of the subject matter involved, and reasonably inform the defendant as to the nature and character of the claim and the several items thereof, which he may be required to meet. But the Court has never held to exactness of time between the proof and that contained in the bill of particulars.</p> <p>2. There is a presumption of payment of a judgment after twenty years or more from the recovery thereof, without any payment or process upon it or recognition or acknowledgment of it, within twenty years, as a subsisting debt. But such presumption may be rebutted by evidence of some acknowledgment or other recognition.</p> <p>3. The statute of frauds held to apply to contracts which, according to the intent and express understanding of the parties, cannot possibly be performed within one year, or which, by the special terms thereof, are to continue for more than one year; but not to such as may, by any possibility, be performed within a year, or when the performance rests upon a contingency which may happen within a year.</p> <p>4. The act of 1893, known as the lien law, Revised Code, 814, held to be constitutional, a reasonable time having been given by the terms of the act to judgment creditors in which to renew and continue their liens. Such statute merely affects the remedy for the enforcement of the judgmentthat is, it shortens the time for the existence of the lien, without impairing the obligation of the contract.</p>