Sanders v. Gillett
This text of 8 Daly 183 (Sanders v. Gillett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The lien of the attorney has, in this State, always been regarded as subject to the equitable right of set-off between the parties. I adverted to this distinction in Ward v. Wordsworth (1 E. D. Smith, 603) as settled by the cases of Spencer v. White (1 Johns. Cases, 102), Pindar v. Morris (3 Cai. 165) and The People, &c., v. Manning (13 Wend. 652), and it was upheld in Roberts v. Carter (24 How. Pr. 44) and Brooks v. Handford (15 Abb. Pr. 342).
The decision below, therefore, must be affirmed, there being no question where the defendant is insolvent, but that it is equitable to order the set-off. (Rignolet v. Greer, 19 Abb. Pr. 264 ; Bradley v. Angell, 3.N. Y. 475.)
Yah Hoesen, J., concurred.
Order affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
8 Daly 183, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sanders-v-gillett-nyctcompl-1878.