Dewsnap v. Davidson
This text of 26 A. 902 (Dewsnap v. Davidson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The court is of the opinion that the demurrer to the replication should be overruled. The plaintiffs were not barred by the decree in the lien suit from bringing an action for the damages sustained by the failure of the defendant to comply with his contract. While they might have offered evidence in the lien suit to recoup the damages sustained they were not bound to do so, but were at liberty to reserve their claim and to bring suit on it as they have done. Ives v. Van Epps, 22 Wend. 155, 157; Gillespie v. Torrance, 25 N. Y. 306, 310; Britton v. Turner, 6 N. H. 481, 495; Austin v. Foster, 9 Pick. 341, 346; Ward v. Fellers, 3 Mich. 281, 291; Van Epps v. Harrison, 40 Amer. Decis. 314, 326, note.
Demurrer overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
26 A. 902, 18 R.I. 98, 1892 R.I. LEXIS 11, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dewsnap-v-davidson-ri-1892.