Devoy v. Boyer
New York Supreme Court
THERE were three suits between the plaintiff and the defendant in this court. The first was on a promissory note, in which the plaintiff recovered damages. The second was on a-contract in which the plaintiff also recovered damages. In the third suit, there was a verdict for the defendant. now moved to set off the entire damages recovered by the defendant in the last suit against the amount recovered in the two other 'suits.
Read the full summary
THERE were three suits between the plaintiff and the defendant in this court. The first was on a promissory note, in which the plaintiff recovered damages. The second was on a-contract in which the plaintiff also recovered damages. In the third suit, there was a verdict for the defendant. now moved to set off the entire damages recovered by the defendant in the last suit against the amount recovered in the two other 'suits. He stated that the defendant was insolvent. said, that the plaintiff had no objection to the set-off, provided the costs of suit in the two first causes were paid.
1Per curiam
The costs of the attorney for the plaintiff in the two first suits must be paid; he has a lien for them, which ought not to be affected by the set-off. It was so decided in the case of Cole v. Grants,* and that must govern our decision in the present case.
2 Caines, 105.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Cole v. GrantNew York Supreme Court · 1804
3Cited by8 opinions
- Dunkin v. VandenberghNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
- Temple & Beaupre v. ScottSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1859
- Baker v. CookMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Phillips v. MacKaySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1892
- Roberts v. MitchellTennessee Supreme Court · 1895
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.