Case ID: ny-sup-ct_14/html/0230-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Daniels, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

WILLIAM B. WINTERTON, Administrator, etc., Respondent, v. ADONIRAM J. WINTERTON, Appellant.
    
      Statute of limitations— Code, § 110 — acknowledgment of debt — to whom made.
    
    The law does not require that the acknowledgment of a debt, to render it effectual under the statute, should be exclusively and wholly made by the debtor to the creditor. It will defeat the operation of the statute if made, to the creditor’s agent, or some person acting for him or in his interest, who may be reasonably expected to communicate it to him, and on which communication he may be expected to repose. {Bloodgood v. Bruen, 4 Seld., 362, 367; Walceman v. Sherman, 5 id., 85, 91; Henry v. Boot, 33 N. Y., 526; Chasemere v. Turner, 38 Law Times [2ST. S. ], 323; Com. Law Series, pt. 2, p. 500; Bell v. Morrison, 1 Pet., 351.)
    
      Motion by defendant for a new trial on exceptions ordered to be first beard by the General Term.
    
      Albert Stielcney, for the defendant. W. B. Hoxie, for the plaintiff.
   Opinion by

Daniels, J.

Davis, P. J., and Brady, J., concurred.

Motion for new trial denied. Judgment for plaintiff on tbe verdict of tbe jury.