Rogers v Quinn

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 07 November 1889
• Date: 07 November 1889
• Court: Exchequer Division (Ireland)

Ex. Div.

ROGERS

and

QUINN

Richardson v. FennENR Lofft. 86.

Mountstephen v. BrookeENR 3 B. & Ald. 141.

Halliday v. WardENR 3 Camp. 32.

Clark v. HoughamENR 2 B. & C. 149.

Smith v. PooleENR 12 Sim. 17.

Spollan v. MaganUNK 1 Ir. C. L. R. 691.

In re Littles 19 Ir. Eq. R. 275.

Courtenay v. WilliamsENR 3 Hare. 549.

Gale v. Capern 1 A. & E. 102.

Clark v. HooperENR 10 Bing. 480.

Goodwin v. CulleyENR 4 H. & N. 373.

Grenfel v. Girdlestone 2 Yo. & Coll. 676.

Fuller v. RedmanENR 26 Beav. 614.

Moodie v. bannisterENR 4 Drew. 439

Tanner v. SmartENR 6 B. & C. 603.

Cassidy v. FirmanUNK Ir. R. 1 C. L. 8.

Anner v. SmartENR 6 B. & C. 605.

Hurst v. ParkerENR 1 B. & A. 92.

Status of Limitations — Debt — Acknowledgment to stranger.

ROCKERS v. QUINN. Statute of Limitations-Debt-Acknowledgment to stranger. An acknowledgment of a debt barred by the Statute of Limitations, and given by the debtor to a person who was neither agent of, nor in privity with, the creditor, is insufficient as a promise to pay the debt so as to enable the creditor to sue the debtor. Tanner v. Smart (6 B. & C. 603) followed. CASE STATED by Mr. Justice Andrews, under the 25th section of the Act 27 & 28 Viet. c. 99, as follows : 1. At the Armagh Spring Assizes, 1889, an appeal was heard before me in a civil-bill action, commenced on the 15th December, 1888, in which the plaintiff as administrator de bonis non of J. Porter, deceased, sued the defendant for recovery of £43 for prinÂcipal and interest due upon a promissory note passed by defendant to deceased, the particulars whereof were not known to the plaintiff, and which note the defendant wrongfully possessed himself of and refused to give up. 2. The civil bill also contained counts for money lent and on account stated, and for interest, and for the value of a certain proÂmissory note, plaintiff's property, which was passed by defendant to said J. Porter, deceased, and which defendant took and conÂverted to his own use. 3. The County Court Judge only gave the plaintiff a decree (dated 3rd January, 1889) for sixpence, for the value of the proÂmissory note, on the count for conversion, with 6s. 9d. costs. The plaintiff appealed, and the whole case was gone into on this appeal. 4. The note sued on was produced at the hearing and proved ; it was signed by Quinn (the defendant) and one P. M'Court, and was in these words : " £34 28. 6d. We jointly and we severally promise to pay to J. Porter, or order, six weeks after date, the sum of £34 2s. 6d., together with legal interest at the rate of 6 per Yu,. XXVI.] Q. B. & EX. DIVISIONS. cent per annum," and dated " the 28th March, 1876, first truly read." 5. J. Porter died intestate in November, 1883, and administraÂtion to his estate was granted to one Mary Wright on the 14th January, 1884 ; and after her death administration de bonis non was granted to the plaintiff on the 7th September, 1886. 6. One John White and his wife lived with J. Porter for many years and up to the time of his death. 7. J. Porter was a lender of money, and took promissory notes from the borrowers. 8. The above note of 28th March, 1876, and (as it appeared) a number of...