The book The American Law Register And Review, volume 40 was written by author University of Pennsylvania. Dept. of Law Here you can read free online of The American Law Register And Review, volume 40 book, rate and share your impressions in comments. If you don't know what to write, just answer the question: Why is The American Law Register And Review, volume 40 a good or bad book?
What reading level is The American Law Register And Review, volume 40 book?
To quickly assess the difficulty of the text, read a short excerpt:
The jurisdiction of courts of equity over the subject of set-off was exercised before there was any statute upon the subject,' and has often been applied in cases not within the statutes.* By the civil law, from which the great body of our system of equity comes, a cross-debt was, by mere operation of law, without any act of the parties, extin- guished. It was treated as an absolute payment. Courts of equity in this country, while not going so far, have accom- plished the same results in numero...us cases, by granting > Gree v. Farmer, 4 Burrows, 2214, 2220, cited in 2 Story, Eq. Jur., i 1433. « 129 U. S., 255, 256 ; 9 Sap. Ct Rep., 295. ' Hawkins v. Freeman, 2 £q. Cas. Abr., 10; Chapman v. Derby, 2 Vem., 117. * WiUiams v, Davis, 2 Sim., 461 ; ExparU Prescott, i Atk., 331 ; Lanesborongh v, Jones, i P. Wms., 326; Greene v. Darling, 5 Mason, 207. Digitized by Google 74 NASHVILLlS TRUST CO. V. THE BANK. srpetual injunctions against judgments in favor of insolv- it persons who were indebted in larger amounts to the idgment debtor/ and in other cases, where, on account ' the non-residence of the judgment plaintiflF, or for ;her reason, the defendant could not save the demand due imself except by setting it oflf against the judgment* he Court, in all such cases, is governed, not by the statute f set-oflf, but by the general principles of equity,* and the ^neral principle of equitable set-oflF seems to be allowed here the party claiming it appears, in good conscience, > be entitled to it, and no superior equity in favor of the arty resisting it will be thereby defeated.* The same ithor says: '*The natural equity, to have mutual, but Qconnected, demands, between two parties who have been ealing with each other, set oflf, is, as a general rule, iperior to the claim of any other creditor who has not ealt with the insolvent upon the faith of specific fund jainst which the right of set-oflf is claimed."* With lese general principles in view, we proceed to examine le reasons urged in arguments for and against the appli- ition of the doctrine of equitable set-oflf in this case.
User Reviews: