Gordon v. Bruner
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Perry Circuit Court. cited in argument Schubart v. Harteau, 34 Barb., N. Y., 447; Signot v. Redding, 4 B. D. Smith, N. Y., 285; Waterm. Set-off, § 6; 1 Yans. PL, 2d ed., 554; Austin v. Beland, 8 Mo. 309; Waterm. Set-off, § 286; Grand Lodge v. Knox, 20 Mo. 433 ; Mcllvaine v. Harris, 20 Mo. 457; 4 Kent, 549; 1 Nash, 104, § 13. cited in argument Sly-back v. Jones, 9 Ind. 470 ; Barhyte v. Hughes, 33 Barb. 320; Waterm.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Perry Circuit Court. cited in argument Schubart v. Harteau, 34 Barb., N. Y., 447; Signot v. Redding, 4 B. D. Smith, N. Y., 285; Waterm. Set-off, § 6; 1 Yans. PL, 2d ed., 554; Austin v. Beland, 8 Mo. 309; Waterm. Set-off, § 286; Grand Lodge v. Knox, 20 Mo. 433 ; Mcllvaine v. Harris, 20 Mo. 457; 4 Kent, 549; 1 Nash, 104, § 13. cited in argument Sly-back v. Jones, 9 Ind. 470 ; Barhyte v. Hughes, 33 Barb. 320; Waterm. Set-off, etc., 154-5, 149, 150, §§ 124-5 ; 49 111. 90 ; 48 111. 408 ; 42 111. 500; 3 Gill, 227; Barb. 320 ; Pratte v. Menkins, 18 Mo. 158.
1Opinion of the CourtBliss, Judge
In an action upon a promissory note for $1,000, the defendant, by way of counter-claim, sought to set-off or recoup the value of a crop of corn taken by the plaintiff from his farm. It appears that the plaintiff conveyed the farm to the defendant without reserving the growing crops, and afterward harvested a crop of corn without his consent. It also appears that plaintiff is a non-resident, and unless the defendant can recover in this manner he is without present remedy.
Under the statutory term “counter-claim” is included what was before known as a matter of set-off and recoupment, and it is…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Willet v. WilletSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
- Grand Lodge of Masons v. KnoxSupreme Court of Missouri · 1855
- Floyd v. WileySupreme Court of Missouri · 1824
- Johnson v. StraderSupreme Court of Missouri · 1834
- Choisser v. HargraveIllinois Supreme Court · 1836
3Cited by16 opinions
- Terry Trading Corp. v. BarskyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- Story & Isham Commercial Co. v. StoryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Cramer v. City of BurlingtonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1875
- Thayer-Moore Brokerage Co. v. CampbellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912
- Emery v. St. Louis, Keokuk & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1883
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.