Boyle v. Wilcox

Supreme Court of Iowa

Boyle v. Wilcox

13 N.W. 428, 59 Iowa 466

DecidedOctober 5, 1882

StatusPublished

This text of 13 N.W. 428 (Boyle v. Wilcox) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Boyle v. Wilcox, 13 N.W. 428, 59 Iowa 466 (iowa 1882).

Pincite

Opinion

Adams, J.

This case comes to ns upon a certificate duly presenting the question as to the correctness of the ruling of the court upon the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The difficulty appears to arise solely out of the difference in views which are taken of the defendants’ pleading. The plaintiff’s view seems to be that the defendants not only deny that there was ever anything due the plaintiff on the alleged account, but aver that there is due from her to them the sum of $29.00 for money advanced to her by them. But we do not think that this view can be sustained. It is true that the payments pleaded are called a counter-claim. But, if the money advanced was advanced as payments, such payments become merely a matter of defense. The defendants did not claim that they had overpaid, or advanced money as payments by mistake, nor did they ask for any judgment. The controversy between the parties appears to be this: The plaintiff admitted payments, to the amount of $12.00; the defendants claimed payments to the amount of $29.00. The amount in controversy, we think, was not greater than the amount of the plaintiff’s claim, $20.15, and it follows that the defendants’ motion to dismiss should have been sustained.

Reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Adams, J.

This case comes to ns upon a certificate duly presenting the question as to the correctness of the ruling of the court upon the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The difficulty appears to arise solely out of the difference in views which are taken of the defendants’ pleading. The plaintiff’s view seems to be that the defendants not only deny that there was ever anything due the plaintiff on the alleged account, but aver that there is due from her to them the sum of $29.00 for money advanced to her by them. But we do not think that this view can be sustained. It is true that the payments pleaded are called a counter-claim. But, if the money advanced was advanced as payments, such payments become merely a matter of defense. The defendants did not claim that they had overpaid, or advanced money as payments by mistake, nor did they ask for any judgment. The controversy between the parties appears to be this: The plaintiff admitted payments, to the amount of $12.00; the defendants claimed payments to the amount of $29.00. The amount in controversy, we think, was not greater than the amount of the plaintiff’s claim, $20.15, and it follows that the defendants’ motion to dismiss should have been sustained.

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 N.W. 428, 59 Iowa 466, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boyle-v-wilcox-iowa-1882.