Codrington against Lloyd, Gent., one, &
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 June 1839 |
| Date | 01 June 1839 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 112 E.R. 909
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH
S. C. 3 N. & P. 442; 1 W. W. & H. 358; 7 L. J. Q. B. 196. Referred to, Green v. Elgie, 1845, 5 Q. B. 114.
codrington against lloyd, gent., one, &c. Friday, June 1st, 1839. Where an arrest is made under process which is afterwards set aside for irregularity, the attorney in the suit is liable in trespass, as well as the plaintiff. And if, in an action of trespass, he justifies under the process, it is a good replication, that the process was irregularly sued out, arid was afterwards set aside, by rule of Court, for irregularity. Where issues are joined in fact and in law on the same count, and the plaintiff obtains judgment on the issue in law, and then proceeds to try the issue in fact, the jury process must be awarded to assess damages on the issue in law as well as to try the issue in fact; although the latter issue goes to the whole cause of action in the count. Where the plaintiff in such a case delivered an issue and notice of trial with a venire only to try the issue in fact, the Court set them aside for irregularity, with costs. [S. G.3N.& P. 442; 1 W. W. & H. 358; 7 L. J. Q. B. 196. Referred to, Green v. Elgie, 1845, 5 Q. B. 114.] Trespass for an assault and false imprisonment. Pleas, not guilty, and a justification. Replication, to the first plea, similiter; to the second, a new assignment. Pleas to the new assignment, 1. Not guilty. 2. A special plea in excuse of the arrest, which it is unnecessary to set out. 3. That defendant was an attorney of the Court of Exchequer; that plaintiff was indebted to Francis Paiplief in the sum of 1121.; that F. P., for the recovery of the debt, retained defendant to sue out an alias capias for him against plaintiff: whereupon defendant, as F. P.'s attorney in that behalf, sued out of the Exchequer a writ of alias capias against plaintiff at the suit of F. P., directed to the Sheriff of Hants, commanding him, &c., which writ was duly indorsed for bail, &c. ; and by defendant, as F. P.'s attorney, and by his command, delivered to the sheriff to be executed ; and by virtue of which writ, afterwards, &c., plaintiff was duly arrested by the said sheriff, and imprisoned, &c. Verification. Repli-[450]-cation : 1. To the first plea to the new assignment, similiter. To the second, a traverse of the matter of excuse, on which traverse issue was joined. 3. To the third, that the said writ, under which tho defendant attempts to justify, was, on, &s., irregularly sued and prosecuted out of the said Court of Exchequer; and that afterwards, to wit on, &c., by a certain order then made by the Right Hon. Sir J. Parke, Knight, one of the Barons, &c., bearing date, &c., and which order was afterwards duly made a rule of the said Court, it was, upon hearing, &c. (counsel on each side), and reading the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Connelly v Wallace and Others
...38. (1) 11 C. B. 434. (2) 1 Q. B. 3. (3) 18 Q. B. D. 471. (4) 55 L. T. 543. (5) 7 Q. B. 928. (6) 3 Moo. P. C. 36. (7) 4 H. & N. 712. (8) 8 A. & E. 449. (9) [1919] 1 I. R. (10) 6 L. R. (Ir.) 455. (11) 10 Q. B. 359. (12) 39 I. L. T. R. 221. (13) [1928] I. R. 308. (14) [1905] 2 I. R. 318. (15)......
-
Challenger Technologies v Dennison Transoceanic Corporation
... ... was drawn to Challenger`s sale of Avery labels on one occasion when he visited the Superstore at Funan Centre ... D), who had previously advised ADC on infringements against its LabelPro software. Mr Gilbert Leong (Leong), a ... In Codrington v Lloyd (1839) 8 Ad & El 459, the defendant was retained ... ...
-
Peacock v Bell and Kendal
...202, Sedley v. Sutherland. 6 B. & C. 38, Bates v. Pilling. 9 D. & R. 44, S. C. 6 A. & E. 407, Sowell v. Champion. 2 Nev. & P. 627, S. C. 8 A. & E. 449, Oodringtm, v. Lloyd. 1 Perr. & D. 157, S. C. As to the liability of the plaintiff, see 3 Wils. 368. 9 East, 346, Carrett v. Smallpage. 6 B.......
-
Kinning v Buchanan
...Clement v. Leiois (7 J. B. Moore, 200, 3 B. & B. 297); Newtmv. Harland (1 M. &G. 644, 1 Scott, N. E. 474, 502, 3); Codrington v. Lloyd (8 Ad. & E. 449, 1 P. & D. 157); Kinning, Exparte (16 Law Journ., N. S., Q. B. 257). Cur. adv. vult. wilde, C. J., now delivered the judgment of the court (......