Bland v Buckley

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date06 June 1818
Date06 June 1818
CourtExchequer

English Reports Citation: 146 E.R. 733

IN THE COURT OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER

Bland
and
Buckley

bland v. buckley. Saturday, 6th June 1818.-A party in custody for a contempt in disobedience of the process of the Court, will not be discharged without undertaking not to bring an action, when, by his own device, the process had been served, in point of fact, on another person of the same name.-It is not the practice of this Court to serve a subprena ad respondendum, by leaving the body of the writ with the defendant, where there is but one, as is the practice in tha Court of Chancery. It is sufficient if a copy be left, and the original produced. Clarke shewed cause against a rule which had been obtained by Treslove for setting aside the writ of attachment issued in this cause, should not be set aside, and why Thomas Buckley, the elder, in custody by virtue thereof, should not be discharged. The applicant's family (as it appeared from the affidavits) had directed the officer who called to serve him with process, to the house of his grandson (of the same name), in the neighbourhood, and the subpiena (ad resp.) was accordingly served there, by leaving a copy with the wife, and shewing her the original writ. The defendant not appearing, he was arrested on an attachment for the contempt. The defendant had not denied knowledge of the service, or the other facts, and On that point the Court were of opinion that the rule to shew cause ought not to have been granted in the first instance: and, treating the whole as an evasion, they refused to make an order for the liberation [35] of the defendant, unless he would undertake not to bring any action for the arrest and...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT