Case ID: johns_8/html/0123-01.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

Willett against Starr.
    Where an attorney of this court was sued in November, 1809, for 25 dollars and 93 cents, and had a set-off of 20 dollars and 25 cents, and the plaintiff recovered 5 dollars and 68 cents, it was held, that* the defendant' was entitled to recovercostsjbuC that the plaintiff might set off tha amount he had recovered a« gainst so much of the costs.
    THIS was an action of assumpsit. The plaintiff’s demand was for 25 dollars and 93 cents, and the defendant, who is an attorney of this court, had a set-off of 20 dollars and 25 cents, which was disputed by the plaintiff.
    The bill was filed against the defendant in November term, 1809, and the cause was tried in Rensselaer county, when the jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for 5 dollars and 68 cents.
    The only questions submitted to the court were, whether either and which party was entitled to costs, and whether the damages recovered might not be set off against so much of the defendant’s costs ?
   Per Curiam.

This suit ought to have been brought before a justice of the peace. The defendant is entitled to recover costs, but the amount of the plaintiff’s recovery may be set off against so much of the defendant’s costs. (See 6 Johns. Rep. 332. Act, 28th sess. c. 93. s. 6.)