Hosmer v. Merriam

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Hosmer v. Merriam

1 Root 427

DecidedJuly 15, 1792

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Root 427 (Hosmer v. Merriam) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hosmer v. Merriam, 1 Root 427 (Colo. 1792).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

The balance of claims in such cases where mutual credit is given is the sum due. The commissioners on an insolvent estate will allow and report the debt; which must be offset by the court in the action against the creditor, where he owed the deceased more than the deceased owed him, for it would be inequitable, that the administrator should recover the whole sum against the creditor, and the creditor take only the average upon his debt; and the administrator is at liberty to contest in this action, the allowance made by the commissioners. See Hosmer v. Brattle, Haddam, December Term, A. D. 1791.

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

By the Court.

The balance of claims in such cases where mutual credit is given is the sum due. The commissioners on an insolvent estate will allow and report the debt; which must be offset by the court in the action against the creditor, where he owed the deceased more than the deceased owed him, for it would be inequitable, that the administrator should recover the whole sum against the creditor, and the creditor take only the average upon his debt; and the administrator is at liberty to contest in this action, the allowance made by the commissioners. See Hosmer v. Brattle, Haddam, December Term, A. D. 1791.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Root 427, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hosmer-v-merriam-conn-1792.