Case ID: mass_12/html/0182-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Abigail H. Gilman versus William Burgess.
    Where the plaintiff’s judgment was reduced below $ 100 by reason of the defendant’s having filed his demands as a set-off, the statute of 1811, c. 33, | 4, still applied as to the costs.
    [ * 206 ] * In an action of assumpsit for a sum over one hundred dollars, the defendant filed his demands by way oí set-off; by means whereof the plaintiff recovered a verdict in this Court, for no more than the balance of eighteen dollars, he having brought the action here by appeal.
    Rockwood, for the defendant,
    moved for costs on the under the statute of 1811, c. 33, § 4.
   Per Curiam.

The words of the statute are positive. Let the plaintiff tax her costs to the appeal, and the defendant his costs since the appeal.

Dexter, for the plaintiff. 
      
      
        Bernard vs. Curtis, 8 Mass. Rep. 535.