Hart v. Davis

21 Tex. 411
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1858
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 21 Tex. 411 (Hart v. Davis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hart v. Davis, 21 Tex. 411 (Tex. 1858).

Opinion

Roberts, J.‘

The question in this case is, can a tort be set off against a tort, as a libel against an assault and battery with a cowhide. To admit such a plea would establish the rule in effect that a trespass might be justified by a previous libel, if the jury should think the injury inflicted by the libel and trespass about equal. Or in other terms, it would permit one who was slandered to obtain his redress by an assault, instead of a suit, provided he could establish that he had imposed no greater injury on the assaulted than had been done to him by the slander.

[412]*412The Common Law tolerates no rule which would permit such a retaliation of injuries. Indeed the simplicity and directness of its remedies disallowed set offs of any sort. It is consequently to other sources we must look for both the existence and extent of this remedy by set off.

Such a case as this is evidently not included within the provisions of our Statute of “ discounts and set offs.” (Hart. Dig. p. 222.) Though it has been held that equity will extend the remedy beyond the limits of the Statute, still it never has been held, as is believed, to extend to a case of tort like the present. Nor is there any equitable ground presented, which would require the rule to be extended beyond the Statute. It is alleged that Davis was insolvent at the time of the assault. The insolvency is alleged rather as a reason for the castigation, in the absence of another remedy, than as an equitable ground of relief in defence of the suit.

We are of opinion that the Court did not err in striking out the plea setting up the libel. Judgment is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Farmers' Cash Union v. Elswood
248 P. 477 (Utah Supreme Court, 1926)
Dees v. Thompson
166 S.W. 56 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1914)
McCormick v. Schtrenck
130 S.W. 720 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1910)
Miller v. Black
120 S.W. 559 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1909)
Misek v. O'Shea
62 P. 491 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1900)
Shook v. Peters
59 Tex. 393 (Texas Supreme Court, 1883)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
21 Tex. 411, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hart-v-davis-tex-1858.