Trustees of Canton Female Academy v. Gilman

Citations

• 55 Miss. 148

Syllabus

<p>1. Pleading and Peactice. Statute of limitations. New promise.</p> <p>Where a defendant pleads the statute of limitations, and the plaintiff replies a new promise or acknowledgment, in writing, of the claim sued on, within the time pleaded as a bar, but does not traverse the plea, the only issue presented is on the new promise or acknowledgment. And the question whether the time pleaded is a bar to the action cannot be raised or considered on the trial, although, in fact, the plea is no bar to the action, and would be held bad on demurrer.</p> <p>2. Statute oe Limitations. New promise. Case in judgment.</p> <p>The following writing, addressed to the plaintiffs and signed by the defendant, was offered as evidence of |an acknowledgment of the debt sued on, to take the case out of the operation of the statute of limitations: “It will suit my convenience to execute my note for the balance due for rent, payable January 1, 1877.” The court rejected it. Seld, that the court below properly rejected the writing, as it is too vague and indefinite to prove such acknowledgment.</p> <p>8. Pleading and Peactice. Failure to demur. Effect thereof.</p> <p>When the defendant’s plea presents no bar to the action, but the plaintiff fails to demur, and a trial is had and verdict rendered for the defendant, this court cannot reverse the judgment, because of the provisions of section 622 of the Code of 1871, forbidding the stay or reversal of any judgment, after verdict, for any mispleading, insufficient pleading, discontinuance, misjoining of issue, or failure to join issue.</p>