TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Barnard v. Curtis

John Barnard, Administrator of John Truman, versus Seth Curtis

Barnard v. Curtis, 8 Mass. 535 (1812)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
March 15, 1812
Citations
8 Mass. 535
Headnotes
Where, by reason of an account hied by way of set-ofij the plaintiff’s damages are reduced below twenty dollars, he is still entitled to full costs ; — aliter, whore the items in the account are proved to have been delivered and received in part payment of the plaintiff’s demand in the action.
Summary
Assumpsit on a promissory note made by Curtis to Truman, by whom the action was commenced, and upon whose death his ad ministrator was admitted to prosecute it. - The defendant filed an account for sundry services performed, and for a puncheon of rum. On trial of the action on the general issue, all the charges in the account were * barred by the statute of limitations; but there was evidence to the jury that the rum had been delivered and received as part payment of the note; and deducting the value of it from the amount due by the note, they returned their verdict for sixteen dollars, the balance found due.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

By the Court.

This case must be distinguished from an account filed and allowed by way of set-off. In such case we have allowed full costs, though the balance found by the jury has been less than twenty dollars. But here was evidence of a partial payment, by which the plaintiff’s actual demand is proved to be under twenty dollars. It is within the statute, and costs can be taxed but to the amount of one fourth part of the damage found by the verdict.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1815–1816: 11847–1848: 11861–1862: 11881–1882: 118152026peak 1815 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Leavitt v. Peabody62 N.H. 185 (1882)
  2. Gilman v. Burgess12 Mass. 205 (1815)
  3. Loud v. Hobart56 Mass. 325 (1848)
  4. Roberts v. Carland1 Or. 332 (1861)

Most recent

  1. Leavitt v. Peabody62 N.H. 185 (1882)
  2. Roberts v. Carland1 Or. 332 (1861)
  3. Loud v. Hobart56 Mass. 325 (1848)
  4. Gilman v. Burgess12 Mass. 205 (1815)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list