Case Name: Hadley's Adm'rs. vs. Thomas Hickman
Court: Tennessee Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Tennessee
Decision Date: 1831-01
Citations: 1 Yer. 501
Docket Number: 
Parties: Hadley’s Adm’rs. vs. Thomas Hickman.
Judges: 
Reporter: Tennessee Reports
Volume: 9
Pages: 501–502

Head Matter:
Hadley’s Adm’rs. vs. Thomas Hickman.
Nashville,
January, 1831.
One judgment may be set off against another upon motion.
At the Jan. term 1831 of the supreme court, Hadley’s administrators recovered a judgment against Hickman for eighteen hundred and sixty dollars, eighty and two third cents; at the same term, Hickman recovered a judgment against Hadley’s administrators for nine hundred and seventy two dollars, twenty two cents.
A motion was made by George S. Yerger, the counsel of Hadley’s administrators, that the amount of Hickman’s judgment should be setofi against the judgment of the administrators against him; and that an execution should be ordered to issue for the balance due upon the latter judgment. In support of the motion was cited Spence vs. White, 1 John. Cases 102. Porter vs. Lane, John, Rep, 35?. Schermerhorn vs. Schermerhorn, 3 Cain. Rep. 190. Wells vs. Crabb, Buller’s Nisi Prius 336. 2 Blk. Rep. 826, 827. Glaister vs. Hewer, 8 D. and East 69. Hall vs. Ody, 2 B. and P. 28. Barker vs. Barham, Blk. Rep. 896. 3 Wilson Rep, 396. Dinnie vs. Elliott, 2 H. Blk. Rep. 587.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The authorities cited are clear and decisive that the motion ought to be sustained. It is therefore ordered, that the amount of Hickman's judgment be set off against the judgment of the administrators of Had-ley against him, and that execution issue for the balance.