« 이전계속 »
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.)
I N D E X
CONTAINED IN THIS VOLUME.
2. Even though the tenant has attorned
to her. Trin. 38 Geo.3. Page 310
See EXECUTOR and ADMINISTRATOR.
See PRIZE, No.1.
1. The Court of C. B. will never allow a
supplemental affidavit except to ex-
plain an ambiguity in the original affi-
Page 205 2. A rule was discharged because the
affidavit on which the rule Nisi was
obtained, was not intitled in any Court,
fixed. Osborn v. Tatum, E. 38 Geo.3.
ing proceedings on a bail-bond, should
be intitled in the action against the
bail. Roberts v. Giddins. M. 39 Geo.3.
AFFIDAVIT TO HOLD TO BAIL,
PRACTICE, No. 8, 9, 10.
tion between the deponent and the
See FRAUDS, Statute of, No.3.
PLEADING, No. 18.
1. A native of a foreign ftate in amiiy
with this country taken in an act of
hostility on board an enemy's fleet,
and brought to England as a prifoner
of war, is not disabled from fuing
while in confinement on a contrad
entered into as a prisoner of war.
Sparenburgh v.Bannatyne, M. 38Geo.z.
COMMON RECOVERY, No.3.
and taken a recognizance of bail in
tled it is bad. Green v. Redshaw, E. out an original in the name of both
obligors, and then applied to the Court
that J.S. has made no tender to pay in nizance; the Court granted the for-
344 TRADE, No. 1, 2.
See Costs, No.9.
1. If an annuity deed contain a provito
that the grantor shall repurchase, the
memorial of such deed muft ftate the
proviso and the terms and conditions
of redemption: if it only refer to the
deed, and state the annuity to be re,
deemable " on fuch notice, terms, and
conditions as are therein expreffed," it
does not sufficiently comply with the
17 Geo. 3. c. 26. f. 1. ex parte Anfell
PRActice, No. 23.
Morris v. Wall, WAY, Right of, No. 1.
consideration money was paid to A.B. See AttaCHMENT, No. 2, 3.
Costs, No. 1.5.
PRACTICE, No. 5. 7. 43.
224 having been examined on oath, if no
annuities of A. agree to give up those of their examination. Ridoat v. Pye,
bitrator after the evidence was closed
v. Welles, Clerk, E. 39 Geo. 3. 395 arbitrator's opinion were influenced.
tempt to set them up again as annuity 3. Unless such re-examination appear to
lated fum, or the bond proving bad. ib. management of the Defendant's at-
ib. 1. There is no fraud in the assignee of a
term affigning over his interest to whom
he pleases, with view to get rid of
the lease, although such person neither
37 Geo. 3.
See Morey had and received. |
ib. See Costs, No. 5.
PRACTICE, No. 5.
et Ux. v. Cobourne, E. 36 G. 3. 482 expires on the last day in the Term,
ment for not bringing the body into