Cartwright v Pultney
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 29 July 1742 |
| Date | 29 July 1742 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 26 E.R. 630
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
See Giffard v. Williams, 1869, L. R. 8 Eq. 497.
Case 253.-clerk and Others versus miller, at the Rolls, July 28, 1742. [See Murray v. Barlee, 1831, 4 Sim. 94.] A feme covert, who had a separate estate, employs workmen in her husband's house, without his directions, and promises to pay them ; the Master of the Rolls doubted, whether a parol promise can subject lands, but she submitting to pay, he decreed accordingly. A feme covert, having a separate estate, sets workmen to work in her husband's house, without his directions, and promises to pay them; there are other creditors on the same foot. The bill was brought by creditors against the representatives of [380] the husband, 630 CARTWRIGHT V. PDLTNBY 2 ATK. 381. and the widow to have the separate estate of Mary Miller, and also the assets of the husband, applied towards satisfaction of their debts. Master of the Rolls. I doubt, whether upon the bare promise only, that is but parol, her lands can be subjected, which is what is prayed by the bill; but she submitting, by her answer, to pay, thought this a good reason for decreeing accordingly. (His...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Vice v Thomas
...however, where the legal title ia in dispute, it must be established at law, either upon an issue or a case. See Cart-wngkt v, fultney, 2 Atk. 380; Miller v. Waimingtm, 1 J. & W. 473. It will be perceived that the foregoing observations do not include cases of fraud orjnistake. Upon the poi......
-
Tang Kai-chung And Another v Tang Chik-shang And Others
...in it, but where [there] is not proof of title in plaintiff; and in the case of Cartwright v. Lord Bath [vide Cartwright v. Pultney (2 Atk. 380)], the Court gave leave, and time for the plaintiff to make out his title. In the case of Mr. Baines [vide Warner v. Baynes (Amb. 589)], upon a bil......
-
Langley v Fisher
...case of a fine, which, where there is fraud, this Court will relieve against. Bulkley v. Wttford (2 Cl. & Fin. 102), Cartmight v. Pidtney (2 Atk. 380). The Defendants claim derivatively through George Dike Fisher; but parties cannot retain property obtained through the fraud of others: Httg......
-
Jope v Morshead
...have prejudiced the landlord. The Plaintiff1 has an equitable title, which for the present purpose is sufficient: Cartwright v. Pultneij (2 Atk. 380). the master of the rolls [Lord Langdale]. In this case there is really no proof at all of the facts alleged in the bill as constituting the P......