Case ID: cow_4/html/0021-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Curia.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The People, ex rel. Green, against The Judges of Onondaga Common Pleas
    A notice of set-off need not expressly claim a balance in the defendant’s favor, in order to warrant hia recovering one.
    It is enough to warrant this, that it set forth his demand in the usual form.
    On a reference in the.Court below, between Green, plaintiff, and Hall, defendant, the referees had certified a balance in favor of the defendant, of about $80, which the C. P. had, on motion, refused to set aside, and they rendered judgment thereon.
    This Court had, at a previous term, on various grounds, granted an alternative mandamus, commanding the Court below to set aside the report, &c.
    Now, upon the return, different questions were made; and, among other things, it was objected, in behalf of Green, that the defendant’s notice of set-off, in the Court below, did not, in terms, claim that a balance was due to him over and above the plaintiff’s demand.
    
      
      J. A. Spencer, for the plaintiffs.
    G. C. Bronson, for the defendants.
   Curia.

This was not necessary. The right to a balance in the defendants’ favor followed, upon the common notice, as a legal consequence. They need not claim a balance in terms.

Peremptory mandamus denied.