Case ID: tenn_13/html/0112-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Catron, Ch. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Rutherford vs. Crabb and Wife.
    
    A judgment recovered by a woman, while sole, against A, may on motion be set off,, so far as the principal money and interest is concerned, to a judgment recovered by A, against her and her husband personally, for a devastavit committed by her as administratrix.
    In 1818, Miriam M. Lewis recovered judgment in the Davidson county court, against Wm. Rutherford, for 0418. In 1829, Rutherford recovered against Crabb and wife, a judgment for 0361 56; the first judgment was offered to be set off against the last by Crabb and wife. Mrs. Lewis, after 1818, intermarried with Crabb; Rutherford had sued her as administratrix of Joel Lewis, and recovered against her and Crabb a judgment in this right. He then run a sci. fa. to subject them for a devastavit, and recovered a judgment against them personally in 1829.
    
      Thompson, for plaintiff in error.
    
      J. P. Clark, for defendants in error.
   Catron, Ch. J.

delivered the opinion of the court.

We think there is no doubt Mrs. Crabb and her husband can pay Rutherford his principal judgment recovered in 1829, out of that recovered by Rutherford in 1818. The costs belong to others, and cannot be set off, nor does it appear this was done in the present instance. Crabb and wife were bound to pay the costs to the officers of court, not to Rutherford.

This is rather an equitable adjustment of accounts, by which the court allows one party to protect himself from the separate demand of another, than a set off under the statute, by plea in the nature of a cross action. 4 D. and E. 123: 3 Caine’s Rep. 190, note: 1 Yerger’s Rep. 501.

Judgment affirmed.