Attorney General v Sir John Elwell
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1793 |
| Date | 01 January 1793 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 145 E.R. 646
IN THE COURT OF EXCHEQUER
at the sittings at westminster, junii 14". 277. the attorney general -a. sir john elwell. In an action upon a promissory note interlocutory judgment does not merge the note. A scire facias was brought in the name of the attorney general against Sir John Elwell, setting forth that there had an extent issued against Sir Matthew Kirwood, and an inquisition was taken thereon, which found Sir John Elwell indebted to Sir Matthew Kirwood by two promissory notes, one for one hundred and fifty pounds, and the other for one hundred pounds, and prays that the defendant should shew cause why the Crown should not have execution for this debt. The defendant pleads, that he waa not indebted by those notes, or either of them die inquJaitionis : the attorney general proved (only) Sir John's hand to the notes : the defendant gave in evidence that Kirwood, before he failed, brought an action on these notes, and obtained judgment by nil dicit, and that a writ of inquiry of damages issued, and was executed, and thereupon a final judgment was had ; and therefore that he could not be indebted on those notes, because they were merged in the judgment, according to Higgiiiss case. But it appeared, that although the interlocutory judgment was entered before the inquisition was taken upon...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Claxton v Swift
...C. Nel. Lut. 270. S. C. 2 Show. 441, 494. S. C. Skin. 255. Yelv. 68. 1 Leon. 19. 3 Leon. 122. Cro. Jac. 73, 284. Latch, 124. Cro. Car. 75. Bunb. 199. Lutw. 880. 8 Mod. 43, 166, 242, 295, 307, 362, 373. 9 Mod. 60. 10 Mod. 109. 11 Mod. 190. 12 Mod. 36, 87, 192, 521. Comyns, 311. 1 Ld. Ray. 18......