Blackburn v Staniland and Sawley
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 19 November 1845 |
| Date | 19 November 1845 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 60 E.R. 540
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
Pleading. Supplemental Bill.
[64] blackburn v. staniland. blackburn v. staniland and sawley. Nov. 18, 19, 1845. Pleading, Supplemental Bill. A. filed an original bill and afterwards another bill, which he prayed might be taken as supplemental to the former against B. Some of the statements in the latter were not only inconsistent with, but contradictory to, some of the statements in the former. Both bills were dismissed with costs. The bill in the original cause was filed in March 1841 by Blackburn on bebalf of himself and all the other simple.contract creditors of Thomas Clifford, deceased. It stated that Clifford, by his will, nominated the Defendant tha executor thereof, and that he had duly proved the will and taken upon himself the execution of it, and possessed himself of the whole of the testator's personal estate, and had entered into possession of an inn which the testator occupied at his decease, and was carrying on the testator's business of an innkeeper therein, with the stock-in-trade left by the testator at his death. The bill further alleged that the Defendant pretended that he had never, in fact, proved the will, whereas the Plaintiff charged the contrary, and that, if the Defendant had not proved the will, he had purposely abstained from so doing, and had, nevertheless,' possessed himself of all the testator's personal estate, as executor of his will, and paid some of his debts, and given receipts for monies due to the testator, and sold and disposed of divers parts of the testator's personal estate, and, in all other respects, held himself forth and acted as the executor of the will and the 15 SIM. 65. BLACKBURN V. STANILAND 541 legal [65] personal representative of the testator; and that thereby he had become responsible for the testator's personal estate, and was an executor of his own wrong of the testator's will, and, as such, liable to the suits of parties having claims against the testator's estate. The answer, which was filed in December 1842, admitted that the testator had appointed the Defendant the executor of his will, but denied that the Defendant had proved it, and added that the Defendant, for some time previous to the testator's death, managed the inn for the testator at a weekly salary; and that, on the testator's death, some of his creditors considered that it would be beneficial to his estate to keep the inn open until an...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pimm v Insall
...it may be questioned whether the different statements by the supplemental bill does not render the suit ineffectual: Blackburn v.Staniland (15 Sim. 64). The settlement made by [198] the articles was not void, but was, at the utmost, only voidable by the infant on attaining her majority : Zo......
-
M'Namara v Blake
...M'NAMARA and BLAKE. Colclough v. EvansENR 4 Sim. 76. Milligan v. Mitchell 1 M. & Cr. 433. Blackburn v. StanilandENR 15 Sim. 64. Hodson v. BallENR 1 Phil. 177. The Attorney-General v. Cooper 3 M. & Cr. 258. Richards v. PageUNK 2 Ir. Eq. Rep. 223. Perry v. Phelps 17 Ves. 173. Davis v. BluckEN......
-
Fitzmaurice v Sadlier
...1 N. & M. 512; S. C. 4 B. & Ad. 771. Daly v. KirwanUNK 10 Ir. Eq. Rep. 312. Jenkins v. CrossENR 15 Sim. 76. Blackburn v. StanilandENR 15 Sim. 64. Lloyd v. Johnes 9 Ves. 37. Harris v. PollardENR 3 P. Wms. 348. Atwood v.ENR 1 Russ. 353. Willet v. SandfordENR 1 Ves. Sen. 186. Hitchins v. Basse......
-
Rice v Gordon
...Mr. Sidebottom, for Scarnett. Mr. Bichner, for Mrs. Clarke, &c. Mr. Briggs, for Mr. Ebbetts. Mr. Turner, in reply. Blackburn v. Staniland (15 Sim. 64), Underhill v. Hwwood (10 Ves. 209; 14 Ves. 28), Coope v. Twynam (Turn. & Russ. 426), Stirling v. Fan-ester (3 Bligh (0. S.), 575), Ex parte ......