Wilson v. Eckman

Citations

• 55 Pa. Super. 403
• 1913 Pa. Super. LEXIS 382

Syllabus

<p>Mortgage — Presumption of payment — Evidence to rebut presumption— Declarations by deceased mortgagor.</p> <p>1. The presumption that all debts excepted out of the statute of limitations, unclaimed and unrecognized for twenty years, are paid, is an artificial rule of law and, unlike the statute of limitations, is not a bar to an action on the original contract, and therefore a new promise' is not necessary to sustain the suit. Any competent evidence which tends to show that the debt is in fact unpaid is admissible for the purpose of rebutting the presumption of payment.</p> <p>On a scire facias sur mortgage brought shortly after the death of the mortgagor, and twenty-five years after the date of the mortgage, it is proper to permit disinterested witnesses to testify to declarations of the mortgagor made shortly before her death to the effect that the mortgage had not been paid, and that its lien had interfered with the sale of the mortgaged premises.</p>