Peirce v. Bent
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Facts agreed. On motion, filed by said Peirce to have an off-set of judgments, the one against tlie other, so far as the smaller goes, except the costs due the attorneys.
Read the full summary
Facts agreed. On motion, filed by said Peirce to have an off-set of judgments, the one against tlie other, so far as the smaller goes, except the costs due the attorneys. The facts are as follows : On the 19th day of May, 1873, said John P. Bent brought his action of trover against said Waldo T. Peirce, for the wrongful and unlawful conversion of two promissory notes of hand for $600 and interest, each dated January 6, 1873. Said notes were signed by one Fuller & Stanford, and payable to said Bent or order, and not by him negotiated. Said action was made returnable to the supreme judicial…
1Opinion of the CourtWalton, J.
It is well settled, both in England and in this country, that judgments in cross actions may be set off, the one against the other, when the parties in interest are the same, on motion addressed to the court in which one or both of the actions is pending. If the amounts are equal, both will be satisfied. If *386the amounts are unequal, the smaller will be satisfied in full, and the larger to the extent of the smaller, and an execution will issue for the balance. Such a set-off will not be allowed to defeat an attorney’s lien for his costs ; but his lien extends only to the taxable costs. An…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Greene v. HatchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
- Goodenow v. ButtrickMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
3Cited by8 opinions
- McBride v. FallonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Johnston v. HumphreyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1895
- Skinker v. SmithMissouri Court of Appeals · 1892
- Bennett v. HanleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
- Scholle v. PinoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1898
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.