Case ID: ga_43/html/0459-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Warner, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Thos. C. Ayes, plaintiff in error, vs. Newton Cochran, administrator, defendant in error.
    Loss sustained by the war is not a good plea of set-off to the plaintiff’s demand, unless the plaintiff is connected therewith by some act or fault of his own, and the fact that the plaintiff was a citizen of the State, and adhered to the Confederate cause, is not sufficient to connect him with the defendant’s loss of property by the war.
    Relief Act of 1870. Before Judge Harvey. Floyd Superior Court. May, 1871.
    Newton Cochran, as administrator of W. W. Cochran, sued Ayer on his promissory note, payable to him as such administrator, made in 1860. Ayer sought the benefit of the recoupment and set-off sections of the Relief Act of the 13th of October, 1870. Plaintiff introduced the note, and closed. Ayer testified that he lost $73,500 00 by the emancipation of the slaves, and $7,160 00 by loss of mules and other specified stock. This stock was captured partly by the troops of the United States, and partly by those of the Confederate States. The latter took the mules for which this note was given. These losses all resulted from the war. He and plaintiff both resided here during said war, and adhered to the Confederate Government. Plaintiff’s intestate has a widow and one minor child surviving. The Court charged the jury that defendant could take nothing by his plea, unless the plea and evidence connected his loss, in some way or other, with the fault of plaintiff, and that the simple fact that defendant had lost property by the war, or the results thereof, was not of itself enough to allow his claim of set-off; and the fact that the plaintiff was a citizen of the State and adhered to the Confederate Government, is not sufficient to connect plaintiff with defendant’s loss. The jury found for the plaintiff the amount of the note. Said charge is assigned as error.
    J. W. H. Underwood, for plaintiff in error.
    Wright & Featherston, for defendant.
   Warner, Judge.

This was au action brought by the plaintiff against the defendant, on a promissory note, dated 20th November, 1860. The defendant pleaded, as a set-off, loss sustained by the war. The Court charged the jury “that the defendant could take nothing by his plea, unless the evidence connected the defendant’s loss, in some way or other, with the fault of the plaintiff; that the simple fact that defendant had lost property by the war, or the results thereof, was not of itself enough to allow his claim of set-off, and the fact that the plaintiff was a citizen of the State, and adhered to the Confederate Government, is not sufficient to connect plaintiff with defendant’s loss.” To which charge of the Court the defendant excepted. According to the repeated rulings of this Court, there was no error in the charge of the Court below to the jury on the statement of facts contained in the record.

Let the judgment of the Court below be affirmed.