Gable & Hughes v. Parry & Randolph
This text of 13 Pa. 181 (Gable & Hughes v. Parry & Randolph) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
There can be no set off against against set off, else the parties might desert the record; and the words of the statute are too restrictive to allow it. The point however, has been decided; and the plaintiff rests on his objection to the defendants’ set off. The suit is a scire facias on a mechanics’ lien, for work done to a house, owned by Parry & Randolph, but built by Ewing as contractor. The set off was the price of leaden pipe, sold by the contractor to the plaintiff, who used a part of it, in the building. Now if the contractor is willing to pay, with his separate means, a debt for which he is bound as principal, and the building only as surety, who can object to it? Their common creditor cannot, and the owners of the building will not. There is mutuality enough to satisfy the words of the statute; and nothing else could present an obstacle.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
13 Pa. 181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gable-hughes-v-parry-randolph-pa-1850.