Barker v St. Quintin, Esq
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 22 January 1844 |
| Date | 22 January 1844 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 152 E.R. 1270
EXCH. OF PLEAS.
S. C. 1 D. & L. 542; 13 L. J. Ex. 144. Applied, Hough v. Edwards, 1856, 1 H. & N. 173; Ex. Parte Games, 1864, 3 H. & C. 298; Mercer v. Graves, 1872, L. R. 7 Q. B. 505. Considered, The Leader, 1868, L. R. 2 Adm. & Ec. 317. Referred to, Brunsdon v. Allard, 1859, 2 El & El. 26.
barker v. st. quentin, esq. Exch. of Pleas. Jan. 22, 1844.-Trespass for false imprisonment. I'lea, justifying the trespass under a writ of ca. sa., directed to the defendant as sheriff, and sued out by one F. on a judgment in the Queen's Bench. Replication, that before the writ was delivered or executed, F. released the debt, " and gave notice to the defendant of the release, and thereby then discharged and forbad the defendant from executing the said writ." Rejoinder, that T., an attorney of the Court of Queen's Bench, was retained by F. to prosecute an action of debt in the Court of Exchequer against the now plaintiff, upon the terms, that when judgment should be recovered therein, the said T., as such attorney, should have a lien thereon for his fees ; that judgment had been recovered therein, and that, while the fees were unpaid, and before the making of the release, it was corruptly and fraudulently agreed between the now plaintiff and F., for the purpose of defrauding T. of his lien, and F. should execute a release of the judgment, and that, in pursuance of such agreement, F. executed the release in the replication mentioned; that afterwards, the defendant, having notice of the premises, did, at the request of T., as such attorney, execute the writ in the plea mentioned, and committed the trespass tnodo et forma :-Held, on special demurrer to the rejoinder, that, an attorney's lien on a, judgment being merely a claim to the equitable interference of the Court to have the judgment held as a security for his costs, he has no authority over the execution of a writ of ca. sa., so as to carry it into effect against the order of the plaintiff", evetr though the plaintiff'and defendant should collude to deprive him of his lien.-Held, also, that after a direction of the plaintiff' not to execute a writ of ca. sa., the sheriff', if he does so, becomes a trespasser ; so also, if he detain the defendant after notice from the plaintiff' that he has released the debt.-Seinble, that the replication would have been bad on special demurrer, for not shewing unambiguously that the plaintiff'expressly directed the sheriff not to execute the writ.- Semble, also, that the rejoinder ought to have averred that T. signed the roll of this Court, in pursuance of the stat. 1 & '2 Viet. c. 45.-A debt of record may be discharged by a release under seal. [8. C. 1 D. & L. 542; 13 L. .1. Ex. 144. Applied, Hmigh v. Echvards, 1850, 1 H. & N. 173 ; Ey. parte (lames, 1864, 3 H. & C. 298 ; Mercer v. Graves, 1872, L. H. 7 Q. B. 505. Considered, The Leader, 1868, L. R. 2 Adm. & ec. 317. Referred to, Brunsdm v. Allanl, 1859, 2 El. & El. 26.] Trespass for false imprisonment. Special plea, justifying the trespass under a writ of ca. sa. sued out against the plaintiff on a judgment for 40, recovered by oire Mi Finn in the Court of Queen's Bench, aird directed to the defendant as sheriff of Yorkshire. , Replication, that, after the delivery to the defendant of the said writ of capias, antl before the execution thereof, to wit, on Ac., the said M. Finn, by hia certain deed 12 M. &W. 2. BARKER V. aT. QUINTiN 1271 of .release, sealed with his seal, and now shewn to tbe Court here, remitted, released, and for ever discharged the now plaintiff from the action in the said writ mentioned, and [442] from the said judgment, and from all executions thereupon or in respect of the said judgment, and from all suits, debts, sum and sums of money, actions and causes of action, damages, judgments, executions, claims and demands whatsoever, which the said M. Finn then had against the now plaintiff [prout patet]; that, after the delivery of the said deed of release by the said M. Finn, and before the execution of the said writ, and before the committing of the trespasses &c., to wit, on &c., the said M. Finn gave notice to the defendant of the said release, and thereby then discharged and forbad the defendant from executing the said writ, or from levying or executing against the body of the now plaintitt' upon or in respect of the said judgment, or otherwise howsoever; that, after such notice, and whilst the defendant had full knowledge of the premises, and whilst the said release was in full force and effect, to wit, on &g., the defendant, of his own wrong, and under colour and pretence of the said writj committed the said several trespasses, in manner and form as in the declaration mentioned. Verification. The rejoinder set out the release on oyer, and stated, " that before the said time when &c., and after the 15th day of July, 1837, to wit, on the 1st July, 1842, J. Thompson, being an attorney of the Court of Queen's Bench, as such attorney, was retained by the said M. Finn to commence, prosecute, and conduct an action of debt in. the Court of Exchequer, at the suit of M. Finn, against the now plaintiff, for the recovery of a certain debt which the said M. Finn then claimed to be due and owing to him from the now plaintiff, for certain fees and reward to be therefore paid by the s;id M. Finn to the said J. Thompson, and upon the terms, that when judgment should lie recovered in the said action of debt...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cochard (Bankrupt), Re, (2005) 385 A.R. 1 (QB)
...1986 CarswellAlta 33 (Q.B.), revd. 1986 CarswellAlta 112 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 11]. Barker v. St. Quintin (1844), 12 M. & W. 441; 152 E.R. 1270, refd to. [para. Ross v. Buxton (1889), 42 Ch. D. 190, refd to. [para. 11]. Mason v. Mason and Cottrell, [1933] P. 199 (C.A.), refd to. [para......
-
Gavin Edmondson Solicitors Ltd v Haven Insurance Company Ltd
...money to enable them to carry on business would be deprived of justice, through inability to prosecute his claims in the suit.” 35 Barker v St Quintin (1844) 12 M & W 441 shows, better than any other, that the equitable lien operates by way of security or charge. Baron Parke said: “The li......
-
O'Brien v Lewis
...(5 C. B. (N. S.), 685), as overruling Beard v. M'Carthy (9 Dowl. 136); [608] Cowell v. Simpson (16 Ves. 275); Barker v. St. Quintin (12 M. & W. 441);; Richards v. Platel (Cr. & Ph. 82); Lloyd v. Mason (4 Hare, 132). July 23. the lord justice knight bruce. In this case a client having become......
-
Fairfold Properties Ltd v Exmouth Docks Company Ltd (No 2)
... ... 250F–251B , 252D–E , H–253A , C ) ... The following cases are referred to in the judgment: ... Barker v. St. Quintin ( 1844 ) 12 M. & W. 441 ... Birchall v. Pugin ( 1875 ) L.R. 10 C.P. 397 ... Blake, In re; Clutterbuck v. Bradford [ ... ...