Hepburn v. Hoag
This text of 4 Cow. 57 (Hepburn v. Hoag) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
We cannot determine, in this form, whether the set-off was proper or not. It should have been brought before us as an enumerated motion, upon a case. The statute (1 R L. 315) is plain, that the jury cannot certify a balance in favor of the defendant unless the verdict be for him. Here was a general verdict for the plaintiff, and a distinct certificate of a larger balance due to the defendants. This certificate is a mere nullity; and the plaintiff was regular in taking a judgment upon his verdict. But as there seems to have been a mistake of the practice, by the defendants’ attorney, and there may be some question whether the set-off be not'admissible, we stay the proceedings of the plaintiff, and give the defendants 30 days within which to make a case, and bring up the question, if they choose.
Rule accordingly.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
4 Cow. 57, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hepburn-v-hoag-nysupct-1825.