Cannel v Buckle
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1724 |
| Date | 01 January 1724 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 24 E.R. 715
LORD MACCLESFIELD.
[243] Case 62.-cannel versus buckle. [1724.] Lord Macclesfield. 2 Eq. Ca. Ab. 23, pi. 24; 136, pi. It Feme gives a bond to her intended husband, that in case of their marriage she will convey her lands to him in fee ; they marry ; the wife dies without issue, and then the husband dies ; the bond though void in law, yet is good evidence of the agreement in equity; and the heir of the husband shall compel a specific performance against the heir of the wife. A feme sole was seised in fee of land of about £10 per annum, and designing to marry, agreed with her intended husband, that she upon the marriage would convey her lands to the husband and his heirs ; and for that purpose, previous to the marriage, she gave a bond of £200 penalty to the intended husband, in which the intended marriage was recited, and the condition was, that in case the marriage took effect, she would convey all her said lands to the husband and his heirs. The marriage took effect, and there was issue of the marriage, and the wife made her will reciting her said bond, and devised all her land to her husband in fee and died. The issue of the marriage died without issue ; after which the husband enjoyed the land during his life, and on his death the heir of the husband brought a bill against the heir of the wife, to compel him to convey the lands of the wife to the heir of the husband. Obj. This bond given by the wife became void upon the intermarriage, because it was then (1) suspended ; and a personal action once suspended is extinct: besides, wherever no action lies at law to recover debt or damages, there no suit in equity lies to compel a specific performance, which specific [244] performance is given in equity only in lieu of damages ; and 1 Chan. Cases 21 (Lady Darcy's case) was cited, proving that where a woman on a treaty of marriage agrees with a man, or a man with a woman, there the subsequent intermarriage determines the agreement. Lord Chancellor. The impropriety of the security, viz. a bond from a woman to a man whom she intends to marry, or the inaccurate manner of wording such bond, is not material; for it is sufficient that the bond is a written evidence of the agreement of the 716 OSGOOD V. STRODE 2 P. WMS. 245. parties, that the feme in consideration of marriage agrees the man shall have the land as her portion ; and this agreement being upon a valuable consideration shall be executed in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Drury v Drury
...received an interest under it after he came of age "; which imports, that otherwise it would not have been decreed. In Cannel v. Buckle [2 P. Wms. 243], the principal ease is only upon the execution of an agreement by a wife of maturity, notwithstanding the subsequent marriage, where it was......
-
Gage v Acton. 9 Will. 3. in B. R
...S. C. 1 Ld. Eay. 515, S. C. Barori and Feme 55. 1 Bac. Abr. 291. 1 Pow. on Cont. 314, 443. 1 Com. Dig. 552. Harg. Co. Litt. 264 b. n. 2. 2 P. Wms. 243. 2 Vern. 290. Lill. Ent. 213. Comb. 242. Skin. 409. Yin. Abr. tit. Baron and Feme (Q. a.), pi. 15, Extinguishment (M.), pi. 11, Eelease (U.)......
-
The Right Hon. JOHN RICHARDS, one of the Barons of HM Court of Exchequer, CAROLINE RICHARDS, Widow, CAROLINE MARIA RICHARDS, otherwise WOODHOUSE, and another, v CROASDAILE MOLONY, HENRY MOLONY and Others
...1 R. & M. 64. Burgh v. WheelerENR 8 T. R. 483. Milbourne v. EwartENR 5 T. R. 381. Ex parte CoysgameENR 1 Atk. 193. Cannell v. BuckleENR 2 P. Wms. 243. Bridges v. Bridges 3 Ves. 120. Lord Compton v. Oxenden 2 Ves. jun. 264. Fergus v. Gore 1 Sch. & Lef. 107. Malone v. Geraghty 3 Dru. & War. 2......