Mahan v. Ross

• Decision Date: 31 March 1853
• Citation: 18 Mo. 121
• Parties: MAHAN, Respondent, v. Ross, appellant.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

18 Mo. 121

MAHAN, Respondent,

v.Ross, appellant.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

March Term, 1853.

1. Unliquidated damages are not the subject of set-off under the new practice.

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court.

Knox & Kellogg, for appellant.

R. K. Sanders, for respondent.

RYLAND, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

The plaintiff's action was founded on a promissory note for money. The defendant, in his answer, sets up a claim for damages, unliquidated, against the plaintiff, as an off-set. The plaintiff demurred to the answer, and the court sustained the demurrer. The defendant brings the case here by appeal.

1. This case is directly within the principle heretofore settled by this court, in the case of Johnson v. Jones et al., decided last July, at Jefferson City. (16 Mo. 495.) It was there held, that unliquidated damages could not, under the new code of practice, any more than under the former, be allowed as an off-set. There is no error in the court below in sustaining the demurrer in this case. The judgment will, therefore, be affirmed, the other judges concurring.