Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

5 Me. 74

Hathorne v. Cate

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided May 15, 1827

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · decided 1827-05-15

In an action of indebitatus assumpsit between these parties, the original plaintiff, now defendant in error, sued for $2262,77, being the amount of sundries charged in his account annexed to the writ, during a period of about two years. The original defendant filed his account in offset, pursuant to the statute, claiming an allowance of $'2347,46.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1882

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1827-05-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

The Court

¶1observed that the uniform practice under the statute of 1807, prior to the separation of Maine, had been to allow full costs in cases like the present; and that our legislature, as had been, often decided, in adopting the statute, undoubtedly intended- to adopt its well known and received construction. It is for the interest of the. State that these minor questions, after they have been once, in any manner, judicially settled, should not again be disturbed. But there is an obvious reason for considering the cases of counter demands as not within the meaning of the statute, since they present the anomaly of ajudgment in favor of the defendant for the balance of his account in damages, although it is the plaintiff that sues.

¶2Judgment affirmed, with costs.

/5/me/74 · .json · Public domain