Case ID: root_1/html/0271-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Palmer v. Corbin.
    An averment against the express words of a written discharge, not admissible. '
    ActioN of trespass, committed on land. Plea in bar a discharge — Which is, “ September 13th 1790, received of Selah Corbin forty shillings in full of all book accounts, and of all other demands, from the beginning of the world to this day.”
    Plaintiff replies — That he gave said discharge upon a settlement of their book accounts, and on a dispute they had respecting a steer; that the trespass complained of was not thought of, nor included in said settlement or discharge; and is wholly the interest of one Mr. Talbot. Demurrer.
   Judgment — Reply insufficient. The words made use of in the discharge include this trespass; and an averment contrary to the words of the discharge, is not admissible.