Morrison v. Collins
Citations
- 127 Pa. 28
- 17 A. 753
- 1889 Pa. LEXIS 1075
Syllabus
<p>1. In an action upon a note under seal, brought within twenty years from the time the right of action accrued, the burden is upon the defendant to prove payment, or facts and circumstances from which the jury may properly infer payment.*</p> <p>2. In such action, the fact that the holder was constantly pressed for money, while the defendant was abundantly able to pay, with other circumstances, might justify the presumption of payment within the twenty years, yet such presumption would not arise from the single fact that the defendant was able to pay.</p> <p>3. The fact that in a settlement of open accounts between the parties, about six yeai'S after the date of the note, a balance equal to the amount of the note was found in favor of the maker, while not establishing a set-off, because of the statute of limitations, was yet admissible as tending to establish payment.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- ‘‘[m]ere disagreement with the ... legal reasoning ... does not confer standing [to appeal].”
- “[m]ere disagreement with the ... legal reasoning ... does not confer standing [to appeal].”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Clark, Green, Mitchell, Paxson, Sterrett
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.