Stroh v. Uhrich
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the common pleas of Lebanon county. Michael Uhrich against William Stroh. This was an action of debt on a promissory note, dated 4th November 1833, for one hundred dollars.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the common pleas of Lebanon county. Michael Uhrich against William Stroh. This was an action of debt on a promissory note, dated 4th November 1833, for one hundred dollars. To which the defendant pleaded non-assumpsit, payment with leave, &c., set off and defalcation; and gave the following notice of special matter:—■ “ You are hereby notified, that on the trial of the above cause, the defendant will give in evidence, with permission of the court, that on the 22d of April 1834, the defendant, William Stroh, instituted a suit before Henry Bower, Esq., (now deceased) then a justice of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Rogers, J.
The pendency of a suit is no objection to a set-off of the debt on which it is founded in another action between the same parties. The case of Good v. Good, 5 Watts 116, is an exception. That was an appeal from arbitrators, which is placed by our acts of Assembly in a peculiar situation. If the defendant had offered to set-off his claim against the plaintiff, it would have *59been error to refuse it, as this is an appeal from a justice of the peace, and does not come within the reason of the decision in Good v. Good. But for some reason, which…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Good v. GoodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1836
- Grant ex rel. Lyon v. WallaceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1827
3Cited by24 opinions
- Collins v. CollinsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1861
- Gilmore v. ReedSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1875
- Davis Cookie Co., Inc. v. WasleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Cochran v. CutterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Bower v. McCormickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1873
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.