Carleton v Sir William Leighton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1805 |
| Date | 01 January 1805 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 36 E.R. 255
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
[665] appendix, containing some notes of cases decided before the period at which these reports commence, and not comprised in any of the contemporary reports. N.B. Most of the following Notes were communicated by different professional Friends, and have been compared (whe-rr.ve.r it was practicable) with the Register's bix ks, to which References are made. [667] carleton v. Sir william leighton.(!) 1805. Plea of bankruptcy to a bill by heir at law against devisee ; over-ruled as bad in point of form, not averring distinctly, and in succession, the facts upon which the bankruptcy rested. Not sufficient, for the purpose of such a plea, to state that the Plaintiff was duly found a bankrupt under the commission. Expectancy of an heir either presumptiv or apparent, not an interest or possibility capable of being made the subject of contract. Estate descended after the bargain and sale of the commissioners, and before certificate, is the property of the bankrupt, and does not vest in the assignees, except by a subsequent assignment. The Plaintiff by his bill claimed certain real estates in the Defendant's possession, to which the Plaintiff alleged himself entitled as heir at law; and the case was, that 256 CARLRTON V. LEIGHTON 3 MEE. 668. the Plaintiff's alleged ancestors, by their respective wills, dated respectively in 1794 and 1796, had devised to Sir William Leighton. But, as to the will of 1794, it was void at law, which let in the Plaintiff; and as to that of 179(5, there was, with regard to it, such an influence by the Defendant over the testatrix as would raise hi equity a trust in the Defendant (as devisee) for the Plaintiff (as heir at law). The bill therefore charged fraud, &c. To this the Defendant put in a plea in bar, stating that the Plaintiff had no right or interest in the estates in question : for that, in 17(J2 or 1793, before the date of either of the wills, a commission of bankruptcy was duly issued against the Plaintiff, under which he was afterwards duly found and declared a bankrupt, and all his estate and effects were thereupon duly transferred and assigned to John Jackson of, &c. [6681 This plea was set down by the Plaintiff, and now came on to be argued. In the course of the argument it was further stated, that the Plaintiff obtained his certificate in 1803, and had paid every creditor the full amount of his debt. Fonblanque and Cvllen...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hardman v Ellames
...of the Plaintiff; the analogies of all the cases in Courts of Equity are on these principles against such a plea. In Carleton v. Leighton (3 Mer., 667) the Defendant pleaded a commission of bankruptcy duly issued, under which the Plaintiff was duly found and declared a bankrupt, and thereup......
-
The Estate of Robert Peel Dawson Spencer Chichester
...allowed. R. ST. J. C. (1) In the Court of Appeal, before The Lord Chancellor, and Fitzgibbon and Holmes, L.JJ. (1) 12 Cl. & Fin. 546. (2) 3 Mer. 667. (3) 1 Amb. 394. (4) 3 P. Wms. 132. (5) 6 Ves. 251. (6) 2 Jac. & Walker, 439 (7) L. R. 7 Eq. 371. (8) 4 Ch. D. 413. (9) 45 Ch. D. 51. (10) 21 ......
-
Meek v Kettlewell
...Wms. 182); Higden [469] v. Williamson (3 P. Wms. 132); Grey v. Kentish (1 Atk. 280); Wright v. Wright (1 Ves. 409); Carleton v. Leighton (3 Mer. 667); Wethered v. Wethered (2 Sim. 183); Hyde v. White (5 Sim. 524); Lyde v. Mynn (1 Myl. & K. 683) ; Wheatley v. Purr (1 Keen, 551); Tufnell v. C......
-
A P Holroyd and Others v J G Marshall and Others
...might be ordered to surrender the premises, etc. Lord Chief Baron Eyre refused the relief prayed. Another case is Carleton v. Leighton (3 Mer. 667), where it was [206] expressly declared by Lord Eldon that " the expectancy of an heir was not an interest, or a possibility, nor was capable of......