Tufts v. Norris
| Decision Date | 21 December 1901 |
| Parties | JOHN TUFTS, Appellant, v. D. W. NORRIS |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Appeal from Poweshiek District Court.--HON. A. R. DEWEY, Judge.
ACTION to recover amount due upon a promissory note. Defense Payment in part, and in part, want of consideration, leaving due on said note, as averred by defendant, only the sum of $ 57.73, which is tendered in the answer. The claimed payments in part arose from the balance of a mutual account between the parties, which was set up by defendant. Upon defendant's motion, and against the objection of plaintiff, the cause was referred to one John F. Talbott, for findings of fact and conclusions of law thereon. The referee duly reported, recommending judgment in favor of plaintiff for the sum of $ 1,133.20. Upon the coming in of this report plaintiff moved for judgment thereon. Defendant filed exceptions to the report, and moved that certain findings and conclusions be set aside. Defendant's exceptions and motion were sustained, and the court, proceeding to determine the issues on the evidence introduced before the referee as shown by a certain certified transcript thereof, adjudged that plaintiff should have and recover of defendant the sum of $ 138.66, and, this being less than an amount which defendant had tendered, the costs accruing after said tender were taxed to plaintiff. Plaintiff appeals.
Reversed.
Haines & Lyman for appellant.
W. R Lewis for appellee.
Plaintiff's action was a simple one at law on a promissory note. The defenses pleaded, of payment and partial want of consideration, were legal defenses, and, upon the issues so raised, plaintiff had a right to a jury trial. The only matter pleaded which could have warranted a reference was the claimed credit on, or offset against, the note, arising from a balance of accounts between the parties. We do not understand that a plaintiff, in a law action, can be necessarily deprived of his right to a jury by pleading equitable matter in defenses. The cases involving accounts in which reference may be made without consent of parties, so far as the matter is material here, are those involving mutual accounts, such as were formerly cognizable in equity. Code, section 3735; McMartin v. Bingham, 27 Iowa 234. That is they are cases involving an equitable issue. Now, where an equitable defense is pleaded to a law action while that issue may be tried by the court, the right of plaintiff to a jury trial on the case he presents is not affected. Code, section 3435; Byers v. Rodabaugh, 17 Iowa 53; Hackett v. High, 28 Iowa 539. Doubtless the account here being mutual and lengthy, was such as should have been sent to a referee to be stated, but the claim of plaintiff, and the other defenses, should not have been sent with it. In so far as a reference is concerned, we think that rights of the parties should be deemed the same as where an equitable defense is pleaded in a...
To continue reading
Request your trial