Legal Opinion

Pierce v. Hoffman

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 1856PublishedCited by 1 opinion

HEROE TO imWATJKEE~ CIRCUIT OOUET. This was an action of. assumpsit commenced in the County Court of Milwaukee county, by thé defendant in error against the plaintiff in error.

Read the full summary

HEROE TO imWATJKEE~ CIRCUIT OOUET. This was an action of. assumpsit commenced in the County Court of Milwaukee county, by thé defendant in error against the plaintiff in error. The declaration was in the common counts, with a bill of particulars for work and labor, as clerk in the store of the defendant, claiming a balance of $44.85. The plea was the general issue, with notice of set-off, accompanied with a bill of particulars, as follows: “To divers goods, wares and merchandise (the particular times and amounts unknown), taken out of the store of the defendant by plaintiff at sundry times,…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Oourt,

Cole, J.

The only question which we have to consider in this cause, is whether moneys feloniously taken can be made a proper subject of set-off in an action of assumpsit. This suit was commenced in the County Court of Milwaukee county, to recover a balance due for services as clerk; and on the trial the plaintiff in error proposed to prove by way of set-off, that during the time the defendant in error was a clerk in his store he had embezzled and appropriated to his own use and deposited in bank to his own credit, several sums of money, amounting to several hundred dollars, under…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Elliott v. JacksonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1854
  2. Downer v. EgglestonCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1835
  3. Conklin v. ParsonsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1849

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Norden v. JonesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1873

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API