Curtis v Rush

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date03 May 1814
Date03 May 1814
CourtHigh Court of Chancery

English Reports Citation: 35 E.R. 378

HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY

Curtis
and
Rush

[416] curtis v. rush. Bolls. May 3, 1814. Specialty Security not waived by a Promisory Note, taken for the Balance of tho Account of Interest. An Exception was taken to the Master's Report, disallowing the Defendant in his Accounts, as Executor, a Sum of 200, the Balance of 300 duo for Interest on two Bonds : the Testator in January 1795, having paid 100, and given his Promisory Note for the Remainder. The Defendant insisted, that he took the Note merely as an Acknowledgment, without an Intention of changing his Security. Sir Samuel Romilly, and Mr. Wingfield, in support of the Exception contended, that the Defendant by accepting the Note had not abandoned his specialty Security. Mr...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Bernard John Daly v Patrick Kirwan
    • Ireland
    • Rolls Court (Ireland)
    • 15 March 1847
    ...1 price, 23. Player v. BandyENR 10 Mod. 26. Turner v. Davies 2 Saund. Rep. 148. Ognel v. RandalENR Cro. Jac. 29. Curtis v. RushENR 2 Ves. & Bea. 416. Hatchell v. Cremone Ll. & G. temp. Plunket, 236. Dartnell v. Taylor Ib. 247. Saunders v. Leslie 2 Ball & Bea. 509. 312 CASES IN EQUITY. BERNA......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT