Berney v Pitt, Esq
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1686 |
| Date | 01 January 1686 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 23 E.R. 620
LORD CHANCELLOR.
Followed, O'Rorke v. Bolingbroke, 1877, 2 App. Cas. 822. See Davis v. Duke of Marlborough, 1818, 2 Swans. 108.139 n., and cases there collected; Wiseman v. Beake, 1690, 2 Vern. 121; Nott v. 'Hill, 1683, 1 Vern. 167.
[14] de teem. S. hillarii, 1686, in curia cancellari.e. Case 9.-berney versus pitt, Esq. Lord Chancellor. Jan. 1686. 2 Ch. Ca. 391, S. C. [Followed, O'Rorke v. Bolingbroke, 1877, 2 App. Cas. 822. See Davis v. Duke of Marlborough, 1818, 2 Swans. 108.139 n., and cases there collected; Wiseman v.'Beake 1690, 2 Vern. 121; Nott v. 'Hill, 1683, 1 Vern. 167.] ' The plaintiff being a young man, as he alledged, and his father tenant for life only of a great estate, which by his" death was to come to the plaintiff in tail; 'and during his life allowing the plaintiff but a narrow allowance, he became indebted, and borrowed 2000 of the defendant in 1675, and entered into two judgments of 5000 a-piece, defeasanced each of them, that if the plaintiff out-lived his father, and within a; month after his father's death, paid the defendant 5000, and if the plaintiff should marry 2 VEEK. 15. SPINDLAR V. WILFOBD 621 in the life-time of his father, then if he should from such marriage during his father's life, pay the defendant interest for his 5000, the defendant should vacate the judgment; with this farther clause in the defeasance, that it was the intent of the parties, if the plaintiff did not outlive his father, that the money should not be repaid. January 1679, the plaintiff's father died, and to be relieved against the said judgments upon payment of the 2000 lent with [15] interest, was the bill; which complained of a fraud, and a working upon the plaintiff's necessity when in streights. This cause came first to be heard in Hillary-Term, 27 Car. 2, before the Lord Nottingham, who in regard the judgments were for money lent, and not for wares taken up to sell again at under-value, as improvident heirs used to do ; (1) and in regard of the express clause in the defeasance of the defendant's losing all, if the plaintiff died before the father, did not think fit to relieve the plaintiff against the bargain itself, without paying the 5000 with interest from a month after the plaintiff's father's death; and did decree upon the payment of the 5000 with interest, the defendant should acknowledge satisfaction upon the judgments ; and the money was paid, being 5390, and the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Davis v Duke of Marlborough
...2 Ca. in Cha. 136. Batty v. Lloyd, 1 Vern. 141. Wiseman v. Beake, 2 Vern. 121; 2 Freem. 111. Barney v. Tyson, 2 Vent. 359. Berney v. Pitt, 2 Vern. 14; 2 Rep. in Cha. 396; 1 P. W. 312. Twisleton v. Griffith, 1 P. W. 310. Dews v. Brandt, Sel. Ca. in Cha. 7; dis credited arg. 1 Bro. C. C. 1. C......
-
Gwynne against Heaton and Others
...on a second rehearing, 2 Vern. 27, Mr. Eaithby's edition.) According to the decision in that case, have been Berney v. Pitt, 2 Ch. E. 396; 2 Vern. 14. Wiseman v. Beake, 2 Vern. 121, where the plaintiff was not a young heir. Twistleton v. Griffith, 1 Wms. 310. Curwyn v. Milner, 3 Wms. 292 (n......
-
The Earl of Chesterfield and Others, Executors of John Spencer Esq. v Sir Abraham Janssen, Baronet
...of fraud, for coming recently out of a court of law, Lord North was at first strictly legal, but afterwards relaxed. [310] Berney v. Pitt, 2 Vern. 14. The plaintiff being a young man, and his father tenant for life only of a great estate, which by his death was to come to the plaintiff as t......
-
Talbot v Staniforth
...Smith (26 Beav. 644), Dames v. Cooper (5 Myl. & Or. 270), Bellamy v. Saline (2 Ph. 425), St. Albyn v. Harding (27 Beav. 11), Berny v. Pitt (2 Vern. 14), Henley v. Axe (2 B. C. C. 18; and as cited in 2 Swanst. 141).] Mr. Willcock, Q.C., and Mr. Percival, for the trustees of Sir Arthur Ashton......