Summary

Rufus Wheeler Peckham Thorp v. Bonnifield — Opinion of the Court

As matter of fact he and the defendant had a full settlement, and he did satisfy the judgment at the request of the latter, and both defendants in error now join in a motion to dismiss, predicated upon that settlement and payment, and they both thus ratify the same and acknowledge its sufficiency. The plaintiff in error is in no position to deny the validity of the settlement and payment made at his own request and by himself, when its sufficiency is acknowledged by the other parties.
Source: Wikisource

Rufus Wheeler Peckham Thorp v. Bonnifield — Opinion of the Court

The plaintiff in error cites various cases to maintain the proposition that when the defendant in the case below brings it here for review the amount of the judgment or decree against him governs our jurisdiction, and, as in this case, the judgment is for more than $7,000, he maintains that this court has jurisdiction, notwithstanding the payment and settlement above mentioned.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature