
    WALTON against LIPPINCOTT and CORLIES.
    on CERTIORARI.
    In set-off, items to be set out.
    This eeHiorari was brought by the plaintiff below. One of the reasons assigned for the reversal of the judgment of the justice was, because the justice permitted the defendants below to go into evidence of matter of fact, notwithstanding they had neglected to file a plea of payment and off-set.
    No plea of payment was filed, but a strip of paper was sent to the justice with these words on :
    To balance due Lippencott & Go. 18.00
    but no [*] plea. A verdict and judgment was had for $39.45 in favor of the defendant.
    
      Wall, att’y for plaintiff.
    In the case of the same plaintiff" against one of the same defendants, William Corlies, the court reversed the judgment for the same cause.
   By the Court.

— It hath been repeatedly adjudged that a plea of payment must be filed in order to let in a set-off. In this ease, not only no plea hath been filed, but the account of the defendants is insufficient; a particular statement of their account should have been made out and delivered to the justice, and not the mere balance.

Judgment reversed.

Approved, Walton v. Corlies, Penn. 168.

Cited in McCormick v. Brookfield, 1 South. 71.  