페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

WALVIN

cafe now in judgment is a case where an indorfer has accepted a 1797. part of the bill from his indorlee, which in reason and justice, and according to the constant course of business, and upon the authority of the case of Johnson v. Kenyon, will not prevent the St. Quintin, whole bill from being recovered against the drawer.

The verdict is therefore to be entered for the Plaintiff, who as he is certainly not connected with the first indorfer, will of course be content with the balance due to him. Per Curiam,

Poftea to the Plaintiff.

Engliso v. Darley, 2 Vol. p. 61.

Mr. Justice BULLER was absent the whole of this Terin from indifpofition.

END OF HILARY TERM.

DoE ex dem. GERTRUDE, Baroness Dacre, v. MARY

JANE ROPER Dowager Lady Dacre. The Judgment of the Court in this case (ante 250.) was affirmed by the Court of King's Bench. (See 8 Term Rep. 112.)

CLIFTON v. GERRARD, The Judgment of the Court in this case (ante 522.) was reversed by the Court of King's Bench. (See 7 Term Rep. 676.)

GOODTITLE on the several demises of HOLFORD,

JERVOJSE, and Cave, Bart. v. OTWAY. The Judgment of the Court in this case (ante 576.) was affirmed by the Court of King's Bench. (See 7 Term Rep. 399.)

[ocr errors]

AN

I N D E X

TO THE

PRINCIPAL MATTERS

CONTAINED IN THIS VOLUME.

1.

"A

А

2. Even though the tenant has attorned

to her. Trin. 38 Geo.3. Page 310
ABATEMENT,

ADMINISTRATOR,
See COMMON, No.1, 2.
MISNOMER, No. 1, 2, 3, 4.

See EXECUTOR and ADMINISTRATOR.

ADMIRALTY,
ACTION ON THE CASE,

See PRIZE, No.1.
See MARKET, No. I.
NUISANCE, No.1.

AFFIDAVIT,
PLEADING, No. 24.

1. The Court of C. B. will never allow a
N action on the case to recover da.

supplemental affidavit except to ex-
mages against the lessor of the

plain an ambiguity in the original affi-
Plaintiff in a vexatious ejectment is not davit. Green v. Ředshaw, E. 38 Geo. 3.
maintainable. Purton v. Honnor, H.

227
38 Geo.3

Page 205 2. A rule was discharged because the
2. An action on the case will not lie

affidavit on which the rule Nisi was
against a party suing out a writ if he

obtained, was not intitled in any Court,
neglect to countermand it after pay- the words “ in the" only being pre-
ment of the debt. Shiebel v. Fairbain

fixed. Osborn v. Tatum, E. 38 Geo.3.
and Another, E. 39 Geo. 3.
388

271
3. At leaft unless malice be averred. ib. §. An affidavit to found a rule for stay,

ing proceedings on a bail-bond, should
ADMINISTRATION,

be intitled in the action against the
1. The administratrix of an executo" can-

bail. Roberts v. Giddins. M. 39 Geo.3.
not fue for the double value of lands

337
held over after a notice to quit under a
demise from the testator contrary to

AFFIDAVIT TO HOLD TO BAIL,
4. Geo. 2. c. 28. without taking out See BANK ACT, No.1, 2.
adminiftration de bonis non. Tingrey

PRACTICE, No. 8, 9, 10.
Widow v. Brown, Trin. 38 Geo. 3. 1. An affidavit to hold to bail made by a

310
third perto need not ftate a connec-

tion

UV 3

tion between the deponent and the

AGREEMENT,
Plaintiff. Pieters and Another v.

See FRAUDS, Statute of, No.3.
Luytjes, E. 37 Geo.3.

Page 3

PLEADING, No. 18.
2. If an affidavit to hold to bail be inti-
tled “ A. B. Plaintiff, and C. D. De-

ALIEN, ENEMY,
fendant,” it is bad, and the Defend- See PRACTICE, No.21.
ant may be discharged on entering a
common appearance. Hollis v. Bran-

1. A native of a foreign ftate in amiiy
don, E. 37 Geo.3.

36

with this country taken in an act of
3. An affidavit to hold tobail made in Ire-

hostility on board an enemy's fleet,
land only two days after the pasling of

and brought to England as a prifoner
the bank adt, 37 Geo. 3. 0.45. was held

of war, is not disabled from fuing
bad as not complying with its provi-

while in confinement on a contrad
fions. Stewart v. Smith, M. 38 Geo.z.

entered into as a prisoner of war.

Sparenburgh v.Bannatyne, M. 38Geo.z.

132
4. And a supplemental affidavit was re-

Page 163
fused.

ib.
5. Bailable process was sued out previous

AMENDMENT,
to the palling of 37 Geo.3.C.45. which See Bail Price, No. 1.
regulates the form of the affidavit to

COMMON RECOVERY, No.3.
hold to bail; this process was renewed

EVIDENCE, No.1.
four feveral times without any new affi-

Verdict, No.1.
davit, and the fourth renewal on which 1. Though there be not fifteen days be-
the Defendant was arrefted, was sub- tween the teste and return of a copias,
fequent to the pafling of the above act; yet it is amendable. Davis, One, dr.
and held no objection to tuch process Allignee of the Sheriff, v. Ower ord
that it was founded on an affidavit not Another, M. 39 G.3

342
complying with the 37 Geo.3.16.45. 2. One obligee in a joint-bond having
Crooks, One, &c. v. Holditch, M. sued out a capias against the obligor,
38 Geo.3:

and taken a recognizance of bail in
6. If an affidavit to hold to bail be inti- his own name only, afterwards fued

tled it is bad. Green v. Redshaw, E. out an original in the name of both
38 Geo.3.

227

obligors, and then applied to the Court
7. An affidavit to hold to bail, ftating to amend both the capias and recog-

that J.S. has made no tender to pay in nizance; the Court granted the for-
notes of the bank of England, ex- mer but refused the latter. Tabrum
cludes the poflibility of any other per- v. Tenant, E. 36 Geo.3.
son having tendered for him, and suf-
ficiently complies with 37 Geo.3. c. 45.

AMERICA,
8.9. Wyatt and Others v. Smee, M. See SUBJECT, No. 1, 2.
39 Geo 3.

344 TRADE, No. 1, 2.
8. An affidavit to hold to bail, stating the
Defendant to be indebted “ for da-

ANNUITY,
mages awarded, and for costs and ex-

See Costs, No.9.
pences taxed and allowed,” is fuffi-

1. If an annuity deed contain a provito
ciently certain, for it will be inferred
that the award and taxation were such

that the grantor shall repurchase, the

memorial of such deed muft ftate the
as will support the action. Jenkins
v. Law, H. 39 Geo.3.

proviso and the terms and conditions
365

of redemption: if it only refer to the

deed, and state the annuity to be re,
AGENT,

deemable " on fuch notice, terms, and
See INSURANCE, No.6.8.

conditions as are therein expreffed," it
Nuisance, No.1.

does not sufficiently comply with the

176

48.

17 Geo.

17 Geo.

C. 26.

17 Geo. 3. c. 26. f. 1. ex parte Anfell

APPEARANCE,
and Another, T. 37 Geo. 3. Page 62 See BAIL.
2. If any part of the confideration of an

PRActice, No. 23.
annuity be paid in country bank notes,
the dates and times of payment must

APPURTENANCES,
be set out in the memorial under See Devise, No. 1, 2, 3.
3.

Morris v. Wall, WAY, Right of, No. 1.
H. 38 Geo. 3.

208

ARBITRATION,
3. An annuity memorial, ftating that the

consideration money was paid to A.B. See AttaCHMENT, No. 2, 3.
and C. “ fome or one of them,” is bad :

Costs, No. 1.5.
though it appear that the money was

PRACTICE, No. 5. 7. 43.
paid on the day on which the deed was 2. The Court will not set aside an award
executed by them all. Vaux v. An- on the ground of the witnesses not
fell, E. 38 Geo. 3.

224 having been examined on oath, if no
4. If several persons who have purchased such objection was made at the time

annuities of A. agree to give up those of their examination. Ridoat v. Pye,
annuities on receiving a certain sum of M. 38 Geo. 3.

Page 91
money, and a bond payable at a future 2. It is no ground for setting aside an
day, they retaining their annuity fe- award that one of the Defendant's
curities till the bond becomes payable, witnefles was re-examined by the ar-
the Court cannot under 17 Geo.

3.

bitrator after the evidence was closed
c. 26. order any of the securities so re- on both fides, and the Plaintiff's attor-
tained to be delivered up though they ney gone, though by a different tefti-
may be void. Sir Harry Goring, Bart. mony from what he gave at first the

v. Welles, Clerk, E. 39 Geo. 3. 395 arbitrator's opinion were influenced.
5. At least not unless the creditors at- Atkinson v. Abraham, M. 38 Geo.3. 175

tempt to set them up again as annuity 3. Unless such re-examination appear to
fecurities on non-payment of the stipu- have been brought about by the

lated fum, or the bond proving bad. ib. management of the Defendant's at-
6. Semb. That after payment of the torney.

ib.
money and delivery of the bond to the

ASSIGNMENT,
creditors, their debt is satisfied, whe-
ther the bond prove good or bad.

ib. 1. There is no fraud in the assignee of a
7. If a bond and warrant of attorney

term affigning over his interest to whom
given to secure an annuity, be no other-

he pleases, with view to get rid of
wise noticed in the memorial than by

the lease, although such person neither
way of recital in the annuity deed takes actual pofleffion nor receives the
which is set out, it is not a sufficient lease. Taylor v. Shum and Others, E.
compliance with 17 Geo. 3. c. 26. Van

37 Geo. 3.
Braam v. Ifaacs, T. 39 Geo. 3: 451

ASSUMPSIT,
8. Nor can the Court refuse to interfere

See Morey had and received. |
on the ground of eighteen years having
elapfed fince the grant, and the grantee

ATTACHMENT,

ib. See Costs, No. 5.
9. The Court cannot order an annuity

EXECUTION.
bond to be delivered up to be cancelled

PRACTICE, No. 5.
for want of a memorial, pursuant to PRISONER, No.5.
17 Geo. 3. C.26. though it be void by VendITIONI EXPONAS, No. i.
the first section of that act. Symonds 1. Where a rule to bring in the body

et Ux. v. Cobourne, E. 36 G. 3. 482 expires on the last day in the Term,
10. QuWhether in such a case they the Plaintiff may at the rising of the
would stay proceedings on the bond? ib. Court on that day move for an attach-

ment for not bringing the body into
UV 4

Court,

[ocr errors]

being dead.

« 이전계속 »