SIMPSON v. SIMPSON'S EXECUTOR, 1 Del. Cas. 552 (1818)

Clayton’s Notebook, 60

SIMPSON v. SIMPSON’S EXECUTOR.

Court of Common Pleas of Delaware, Kent County.
May, 1818.

It was ruled in this case: 1. That a probate of an account against the estate of a deceased person need not be signed by the creditor making it. 2. That where there has been a settlement and adjustment of the balance of an account with the executor or administrator of the deceased, the items of the account need not appear. A probate annexed to a statement of the amount of the balance alone is sufficient.

The question whether a promise by an executor would bar the Act of Limitations and avoid a plea of it was argued.

Ridgely, for defendant, referred to 1 Del. Laws 231, 527, 2 Del. Laws 1032.[2]
Hall, for plaintiff, cited 2 Saund. 117c, Chit.Pl. 204, 342.

[2] Footnote by Clayton, “For defendant: Fisher’s Executor v. Duncan and Turnbull, 1 Hen. Munf. 503, 1 Hen. Munf. 401, Gould’s Esp. Ev. 537. Semite, in Delaware the Statute of Frauds too would enter into the consideration.”

PER CURIAM.

The question whether a promise by an executor, when the debt was barred before the testator’s death, is sufficient to avoid a plea of the Act of Limitations is one of great magnitude and difficulty, but not necessary to be determined in this cause, because the debt was not barred when the promise was made, and the promise of the executor probably induced the plaintiff to remain quiet. We therefore think the case taken out of the Act by the promise.

Page 553