Wood v. Milling

Citations

• 32 S.C. 378
• 10 S.E. 1081
• 1890 S.C. LEXIS 54

Syllabus

<p>1. An acknowledgment by defendant, properly dated, endorsed on a summons to renew' a judgment that the amount “stated to be due on said judgment is true and correct,” w'hon filed with the record of the judgment, would seem to be a sufficient “note of some written acknowledgment with the date of such acknowledgment filed with the record of such judgment,” within the meaning of section 1831 of General Statutes, to continue the lien of the judgment for twenty years thereafter.</p> <p>2. Where summons to revive a judgment is served within the twenty years of its lien, and the defendant at the same time consents to the revival, and acknowledges the debt to be due, the presumption of payment then ceases to run, and under an order of revival in such proceeding, the lien is continued for a further period of twenty years. The proceeds of a sale of defendant’s land made by the sheriff under a junior judgment, more than twenty years after the original entry of this senior judgment, but within a year after its revival, were primarily applicable to such senior judgment.</p> <p>3. This case distinguished from Henry v. Henry, 31 S. C., 1.</p>