Between Charles Richardson, on behalf of Himself and All Other Persons (except the Parties hereinafter named as Defendants hereto) who, at the Time of the Dissolution thereof, were Members of a certain Aasociation or Club called the Alliance Club hereinafter more particularly mentioned, who are now living, and the personal Representatives of such of them as are dead, Plaintiff's; and Edward Hastings and Henry Emly, Defendants
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 21 April 1847 |
| Date | 21 April 1847 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 50 E.R. 722
ROLLS COURT
S. C. 16 L. J. Ch. 322.
[17] Between chables richardson, on behalf of Himself and All Other Persons (except the Parties hereinafter named as Defendants hereto) who, at the Time of the Dissolution thereof, were Members of a certain Aasociation or Club called the Alliance Club hereinafter more particularly mentioned, who are now living, and the personal Representatives of such of them as are dead, Plaintiff's; and edward hastings and henry emly, Defendants. April 20, 21 1847. [S. C. 16 L. J. Ch. 322.] A club, composed of numerous members, was dissolved. Two of the managing committee possessed themselves of the assets, and applied them in winding up the affairs. Held, that they might be sued by one member " on behalf," &c., for an account of the monies received and its application, and to bring back the balance, if any, without making the other members parties, and without seeking a general winding up of the concern. This cause (reported on the demurrers, 7 Beav. 301, 323) now came on for hearing. The Plaintiff rested upon the admissions contained in the Defendants' answer; but the Defendants had entered into some evidence. It now appeared that, in 1836, the Alliance Club, consisting of 100 members, was formed. The lease of a house in Pall Mall was taken, and a quantity of furniture hired. Rules were, as usual, made for the management of the club, and amongst them one, by which Messrs. Hopkinson, the bankers of the club, were alone authorised to receive monies on account of the club. The managing committee were to 11BEAV.18. RICHARDSON V. HASTINGS 723 consist of twenty, and every member was to be bound by the majority at a general meeting. [18] The pecuniary affairs of the club having become embarrassed, it was agreed, at a special general meeting, held on the 29th of December 1837, that the subscription should be raised; and that the furniture, which had been hired, should be purchased with monies to be subscribed by way of loan by the members, arid a sum of £400 to be borrowed of the bankers. The Plaintiff Richardson, the Defendants Hastings, Emly, and twenty-one other members accordingly subscribed a sum of £975 for the purpose of purchasing the furniture, and the amount was paid into the bankers on account of the club. By an indenture of the 27th of January 1838, made between Hastings, Emly, and Stewart of the first part, the several subscribing members of the second part, the owner of the furniture of the third part, the bankers of the fourth part, and the Plaintiff of the fifth part, it was agreed that the furniture should be vested in and forthwith delivered to the Plaintiff, upon trust to pay the bankers the £400 and the other sums due to the owner of the furniture and the subscribing members, and to pay the surplus to the committee for the use and benefit of the club. It was also agreed that Hastings, Emly, and Stewart should hold the lease in trust to secure the £400 and interest. The furniture was accordingly purchased, and the lease was afterwards vested in Hastings, Emly, and Stewart. The embarrassments of the club continuing, it was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Evans v Coventry
...Ratdiffe (1 De G. & Sm. 164); Beaumont v. Meredith (3 Ves. & B. 180); Richardson v. Larpent (2 Y. & C. C. C. 507); Richardson v. Hastings (11 Beav. 17); Minn v. Slant (15 Beav. 49); Hallett v. Dawdall (16 Jur. 462); Underwood's cote (5 De G. M. & G. 677); Pearce v. Piper (17 Ves. 1); Clemen......
-
Lewis, on behalf, Company v Baldwin
...[366] Richardson v. Larpent (2 Y & C. (C. C.), 507); Apperley v. Page (1 Phill. p. 784); Richardson v. Hastings (7 Beavan, 301, 323 ; 11 Beavan, 17); Evans v. Stokes (1 Keen, 24); Lund v. Blawhard (4 Hare, 9); Harvey v. Bignold (8 Beavan, 343); Sharp v. Day (1 Phill. 771); Colrnan v. Easter......
-
Minn v Stant
...75); May v. Selby (1 Y. & Col. (C. C.), 235); Horsley v. Fawcett (11 Beav. 565); Bridget v, Hames (1 Col. 72); Richardson v. Hastings (11 Beav. 17); Robinson v. Evans (7 Jurist, 738). Here, if the mortgage money [54] had been tendered, the mortgagee would have been bound to reconvey to the ......
-
Minnitt v Lord Talbot De Malahide and Others
...S.) 441. Earl of Mountcashell v. BarborENR 14 C. B. (N. S.) 53. Richardson v. HastingsENR 7 Beav. 323. Richardson v. Hastings and EmlyENR 11 Beav. 17. Club — Advances for improvement of Club-house, with authority of Committee — Personal liability of members — Lien on property of the Club — ......