Clay v Crowe
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 12 February 1853 |
| Date | 12 February 1853 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 155 E.R. 1358
IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
Reversed, 9 Ex 604
clay v crowe Feb 12, 1855-To an action for goods bargained, sold, and delivered, the defendant pleaded, as to 421, par eel, that before action he accepted a brll of exchange for that amount, drawn orr him by the plaintiH, payable to the plaintiff's order five months after date, that the plaintiff took and received such bill for and on account of the said sum of 421 , and the plaintiff afterwards lost such bill out of his possession, and from thence hitherto the same has remained so lost, and the plaintiff has been unable ^to pr oduce it, and ceased to have any power or control over it and the defendant has nevei since such loss found such bill, nor known where it was to he found, nor had any power 01 control over it 8 EX 2%. CLAY V CROWE 1359 -Held, that the plea was bad in substance, for not alleging that the bill was lost at maturity [Reversed, 9 Ex 604 ] The declaration stated, that the pLiitifciff sues the defendant for money payable by the defendant to the plaintiff foi goods bargained, sold, and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant, and for that the pLuntift, on the 1st day of Apul, in the yeat 1852, by his bill of exchange now over-due, directed to the defendant, required the defendant to pay to the plaintiffs order 281 .'is , two months aftei date , and the defendant accepted the said bill, but did not pay the same The defendant pleaded, secondly,-"As to 421 5s 2d , parcel, &c the defendant aays that, before action, the plaintiff, by his bill of exchange dnected to the defendant, required the defendant to pay to the plaintiff's nider 4;il 5s 2d five months after date , and the defendant accepted and delivered to the plaintiff, who took and leeeived, Such bill for and on account of the said sum of 421 5s 2(1, parcel, &c , and the plaintiff afterwards lost such bill out of his possession, and ftom thence hitherto the game has remained so lost, and the plaintiff has been unable to produce it, and ceased to have any powei 01 [296] control ovei it, and the defendant has nevei since such loss found such bill, nor known where it was to be found, noi had any power 01 control over it" General demurrer, and joinder Atherton, in support of the demurrer (January 17) The plea is bad upon two grounds -first, it rs bad because it does not contain any allegation that the bill of exchange, which the defendant relies upon as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mƒ€™DONNELL v MURRAY
...v. Robinson and Ramuz v. CroweENR 1 Exch. 167. Wain v. Bailey 2 Per. & D. 507. Charnley v. GrundyENR 14 C. B. 608. Clay v. CroweENRENR 8 Exch. 295; S. C., in Error, 9 Exch. 604. Walmsley v. Child 1 Ves. 341. Glynn v. The Bank of England 2 Ves. 38. Miller v. RaceENR 1 Burr. 452. The Guardian......
-
Crowe v Clay
...the loss of the bill be stiuck out of the plea, it will afford no answer whatever to the action. Then what is the effect (a) See the case, 8 Exch. 295, where the pleadings are fully stated. (b) Before Coleridge, J., Maule, J , Cresswell, J., Wightman, J , Williams, J., Talfourd, J., and Cro......