Norvell v. Little

Citations

• 79 Va. 141
• 1884 Va. LEXIS 71

Syllabus

<p>1. Practice in Chancery—Creditors' Bill.—Suit of distributees to ascertain and pay the debts of the estate, and to distribute the surplus, is substantially a creditors’ suit.</p> <p>2. Idem—Idem—Statute of Limitations.—-Upon entry of decree for account in such suit, time ceases to run against all creditors of the estate. Bank of the Old Dominion v. Allen and als., 76 Va. 200.</p> <p>3. Presumption of Payment—Repellable.—It is a well settled rule of the common law that a bond is presumed to have been paid after lapse of twenty years from its maturity. But this presumption may be repelled ■by satisfactory evidence. If less than twenty years have elapsed, such ■ presumption arises not. Yet, even then, lapse of time maybe relied on in connection with other circumstances, as evidence of payment. Booker's Adm'r v. Booker's Rep., 29 Gratt. 605.</p> <p>4. Idem—Period eliminated.—From the twenty years between maturity of bond and action brought, the period between April 17th, 1861, and January 1st, 1869, must be eliminated as respects both the statutory bar of limitation, and the common law presumption of payment. The object of the legislature was to protect debtors from immediate enforced collections, without prejudice to the rights of creditors.</p> <p>5. Case at Bar is one where right bf action on bond accrued 13th September, 1857, and time ceased to run against it 3d December, iSSi, by entry of decree for an account of debts in creditors’ suit. After deducting stay period, less than twenty years remained, and common law presumption of payment arose not. Yet the record discloses circumstances, which, taken in connection with the lapse of time, sustain plea of payment.</p>