Schubart v. Harteau
This text of 34 Barb. 447 (Schubart v. Harteau) 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
A counter-claim, under the code, may be either for liquidated or unliquidated damages, if they arise upon contract.
Where a claim is prosecuted by a plaintiff against a defendant who has a claim against the plaintiff and others, on contract, the defendant may set up the same as a counterclaim, and recover any balance against the plaintiff, over the [450]*450plaintiff’s claim; unless the plaintiff replies to the counterclaim that there are other persons liable with him, as partners. (Briggs v. Briggs, 20 Barb. 477.) In such a case the counter-claim is good, so far as to he a set-off against the plaintiff’s claim to that amount.
It would seem, further, that the case does not differ from one where the party in a suit on his own note, given in payment for property delivered under a contract, makes defense that the property was not according to the contract. And in such a case the ground of defense taken by this defendant must he admissible, and if proved, available.
Judgment reversed,- and a new trial ordered; costs to abide the event.
Clerke, Gould and Ingraham, Justices.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
34 Barb. 447, 1861 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 94, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schubart-v-harteau-nysupct-1861.