Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

1 Lock. Rev. Cas. 396

Close v. Stewart

Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · decided 1799-07-01

In this case the Supreme'Court held, that whenever the court can possibly intend that the merits have been fairly tried in justices’… Held: that whenever the court can possibly intend that the merits have been fairly tried in justices’ courts, they will not examine or test the pleadings by technical rules, as to the formality of pleading; but, if it clearly appear that the plaintiff below had no right to recover, the court will reverse the judgment, notwithstanding a…

Decided 1799-07-01

¶1The Supreme Court decided that the plea was substantially a plea of payment; that the payment under the judgment, was a satisfaction of the original demand, whether the judgment was reversed or not, if the defendant elected not to call on the plaintiff to restore the money and directed it to be retained as a payment of the plaintiff’s demand ; and that the defendant could not afterwards rightfully call on the plaintiff to restore the identical money which he had thus applied. The court therefore reversed the judgment rendered on a verdict for the plaintiff on an issue of fact, holding that the defendant was entitled to judgment on the issue in law, the plea going to-the whole cause of action.

¶2The Court of Errors held, however, that although the first judgment was reversed for defect of form merely, and restitution and costs of reversal, awarded to the defendant; yet that he could not plead the payment made by him on She erroneous judgment, in bar to a second suit for the original cause ,of action.

¶3Judgment reversed.

/1/lockrevcas/396 · .json · Public domain