Henderson v. James Gilliam & Co.
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Red River. This is a suit on open account; defence, set off. The plaintiffs were copartners, the firm 'being composed of James Gilliam, John C. Carter, and James H. B. Dinwiddie. The defendant pleaded that Carter and Dinwiddie were indebted to him by judgment, for three thousand three hundred and ninety-six 50-100 dollars. That said judgment remains wholly unsatisfied; that Carter and Dinwiddie are insolvent, and that he cannot collect said judgment from them.
Read the full summary
Error from Red River. This is a suit on open account; defence, set off. The plaintiffs were copartners, the firm 'being composed of James Gilliam, John C. Carter, and James H. B. Dinwiddie. The defendant pleaded that Carter and Dinwiddie were indebted to him by judgment, for three thousand three hundred and ninety-six 50-100 dollars. That said judgment remains wholly unsatisfied; that Carter and Dinwiddie are insolvent, and that he cannot collect said judgment from them. He therefore pleads so much of said judgment, as will cover two-thirds of plaintiff’s claim. He further pleads that the…
1Opinion of the Court
Hemphill, Ch. J.
In relation to the offset pleaded against Gilliam, it is sufficient to say that the account was not due to the defendant Henderson in his individual right, but to him in partnership with others ; and that it was all, with the exception of one item, barred at the institution of the suit.
In relation to the offset pleaded against Carter and Dinwiddie, the objection is raised (and which is in fact common to the whole discount,) that the debts are not mutual; that the debt, attempted to be set off", does not accrue in the same, but in a different right from that of the plaintiff;…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Goldstein v. Union National BankTexas Supreme Court · 1919
- Neely v. Grayson County National BankCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1901
- Greathouse v. GreathouseTexas Supreme Court · 1884
- McDonald v. MackenzieOregon Supreme Court · 1887
- Rust v. Burke, Turner & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1882
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.