Snyder v. Spurr
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Assumpsit. The defendant pleaded the general issue with notice of a set-off, and on the trial to the court, before Loomis, J., offered in evidence a judgment recovered in his favor against the plaintiff and one Henry Snyder, upon which there was due a larger sum than the amount of the plaintiff’s demand, and claimed the right to set off so much of the judgment as would satisfy the claim of the plaintiff; to which the plaintiff objected, and the court excluded the evidence…
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. The defendant pleaded the general issue with notice of a set-off, and on the trial to the court, before Loomis, J., offered in evidence a judgment recovered in his favor against the plaintiff and one Henry Snyder, upon which there was due a larger sum than the amount of the plaintiff’s demand, and claimed the right to set off so much of the judgment as would satisfy the claim of the plaintiff; to which the plaintiff objected, and the court excluded the evidence and rendered judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant moved for a new trial.
1Opinion of the CourtMcCurdy, J.
The precise question involved in this case upon a precisely similar state of facts was decided by this court in Atkins v. Churchill, 19 Conn., 394. It was there held that the set-off could not be allowed. No reason is suggested *408for a change, and even if it were proper to re-examine the point, we could have no doubt that the decision was correct.
We do not advise a new trial.
In this opinion the other judges concurred.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Atkins v. ChurchillSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1849
3Cited by5 opinions
- Lippitt v. Thames Loan & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1914
- Congdon v. TorreySupreme Court of Vermont · 1921
- Meeker v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1875
- Very v. ClarkeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Richmond v. BlochOregon Supreme Court · 1900