Rollins v. Horn
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit. The defendant filed in set-off a claim which was not barred by the statute of limitations at the commencement of this suit, but which would have been barred at the time the set-off was filed, if this suit had not been brought. The court reserved the question whether the commencement of this suit could operate to prevent the set-off being barred.
1Opinion of the CourtSargent, J.
A set-off was first authorized by the 2 Geo. II., (ch. 22, sec. 13); and this law was made perpetual by 8 Geo. II., (ch. 24, sec. 4), as modified by section 5 of the latter act. By this law it was provided that where there are mutual debts between the plaintiff and defendant, one debt may be set off against the other, although such debts are deemed in law to be of a different nature, except when one debt accrues by reason of a penalty contained in any bond or specialty.
Under this statute it was held that where the defendant pleads a set-off, the plaintiff may reply the statute of limitations…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Zurback Steel Corp. v. EdgcombSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1980
- Chamberlin v. PerkinsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1875