Carter and Another against Toussaint
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 14 June 1822 |
| Date | 14 June 1822 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 106 E.R. 1404
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
Considered, Beaumont v. Brengeri, 1847, 5 C. B. 313; Morton v. Tibbett, 1850, 15 Q. B. 437; Marvin v. Wallis, 1856, 6 El. & Bl. 735. Questioned, Castle v. Sworder, 1861, 6 H. & N. 834.
carter and another against toussaint. Friday, June 14th, 1822. A horse was sold by verbal contract, but no time was fixed for the payment of the price. The horse was to remain with the vendors for 20 days without any charge to the vendee. At the expiration of that time the horse was sent to grass, by the direction of the vendee, and by his desire entered as the horse of one of the vendors: Held, that there was no acceptance of the horse by the vendee within 29 Car. 2, c. 4, s. 17. [Considered, Beaumont v. Brengeri, 1847, 5 C. B. 313 ; Morton v. Tibbett, 1850, 15'Q. B. 437; Marvin v. Wallis, 1856, 6 El. & Bl. 735. Questioned, Castle v. Swarder, 1861, 6 H. & N. 834.] Assumpsit for the price of a horse, with the usual money counts. Plea, general issue. At the trial, at the Middlesex sittings after last Hilary term, before Abbott C.J., it appeared that the plaintiffs, who were farriers, sold to the defendant a racehorse, by a verbal contract, for 301. The horse, at the time of the sale, required to be fired, which was done with the approbation of the defendant and in his presence; and it was agreed that the horse should be kept by the plaintiffs for twenty days, without any charge being made for it. At the expiration of the twenty days the horse was, by the defendant's directions, taken by a servant of the plaintiffs' to Kimpton Park, for the purpose of being turned out to grass there. It was there entered in the name of one of the plaintiffs, which was also done by the directions of the defendant, who was anxious that it might not be known that he kept a race-horse. No time was specified in the bargain for the payment Of the price. The defendant afterwards refused to take the horse. The jury, under the direction of the Lord Chief Justice, found a verdict for the plaintiffs. Scarlett, in last Easter term, obtained a rule nisi for entering a nonsuit, on the ground reserved at the trial, that there was not a sufficient acceptance by the defendant to take the case out of the 17th section of the Statute of Frauds. [856] Marryat and Hawkins shewed cause. The case is not within the 17th section of the Statute of Frauds; for here there was a complete delivery, and acceptance by...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Kealy v Tenant
...RogersENR 1 East. 192. Edan v. Dudfield 1 Q. B. 302. Morton v. Tibbett 15 Q. B. 428. Baldey v. Parker 2B. & Cr. 37. Carter v. Toussaint 5B. & Ald. 855. Parker v. WallisENR 5 El. & Bl. 21. 394 COMMON LAW REPORTS. E. T. 1861. Queen's Bench KEALY v. TENANT. April 29. The Judge, at NEW TRIAL MO......