Doran, - Plaintiff (in Error); O'reilly, and Others, - Defendants (in Error)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 07 March 1817 |
| Date | 07 March 1817 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 3 E.R. 1278
IN ERROR FROM THE EXCHEQUER CHAMBER.
Mews' Dig. viii. 538. S.C. in Courts below, 3 Price, 250; 7 Taun. 244.
Debt in K. B. and demand made in lawful money of Great Britain, founded upon a judgment of the supreme Court of Jamaica obtained in an action of assumpsit in that Court for so much Jamaica currency,-the declaration in K. B. stating that this amounted to so much in British money. Final judgment by default against the Defendant, and error brought in the Ex. Ch.; and there, the errors not being argued, judgment affirmed, and thereupon error in Dom. Proc. Held that [134] the demand being made in lawful money of Great Britain, and the Defendant below having suffered judgment to go against him by default, he had himself assessed the amount, and that there was no occasion to send the matter to a jury by writ of inquiry.
Count in the declaration for interest upon the forbearance of money on request: This is well laid, a promise to pay interest being implied.
Where errors are argued in Dom. Proc. without having been argued below, and judgment is affirmed, though the alleged errors may be well worthy of consideration, the House will make the plaintiff in error pay the costs of the proceedings there, as if the case had not been argued at all in that House.
V DOW. DORAN V. O'REILLY [1817] ENGLAND. IN ERROR FROM THE EXCHEQUER CHAMBER. doran,-Plaintiff (in Error) ; O'EsiLLY, and Others,-Defendants (in Error) [March 7, 1817]. [Mews' Dig. viii. 538. S.C. in Courts below, 3 Price, 250; 7 Taun. 244.] [Debt in K. B. and demand made in lawful money of Great Britain, founded upon a judgment of the supreme Court of Jamaica obtained in an action of assumpsit in that Court for so much Jamaica currency,-the declaration in K. B. stating that this amounted to so much in British money. Final judgment by default against the Defendant, and error brought in the Ex. Ch.; and there, the errors not being argued, judgment affirmed, and thereupon error in Dom. Proc. Held that [134] the demand being made in lawful money of Great Britain, and the Defendant below having suffered judgment to go against him by default, he had himself assessed the amount, and that there was no occasion to send the matter to a jury by writ of inquiry.] [Count in the declaration for interest upon the forbearance of money on request: This is well laid, a promise to pay interest being implied.] [Where errors are argued in Dom. Proc. without having been argued below, and judgment is affirmed, though the alleged errors may be well worthy of consideration, the House will make the plaintiff in error pay the costs of the proceedings there, as if the case had not been argued at all in that House.] ; This was an action in debt commenced by the Defendants in error in the Court of King's Bench in 1815, to recover from the Plaintiff in error the sum of 4934 11s. of sterling British money, due to them upon and by virtue of a certain judgment obtained by them against the Plaintiff in error in the supreme Court of Judicature in and for the Island of Jamaica, before the chief Judge and his associates Judges of that Court, in a suit for non-performance of certain promises and undertakings made by the said Plaintiff in error to the Defendants in error. The first and second counts in the declaration in the action in K. B. at "Westminster, founding on the foreign judgment, were as follows : " London (to wit). Thomas O'Eeilly, George Young, William Gordon, John " Murphy, and James Farrell, who have survived James Westerman May, their late ""partner now deceased, complain of William Doran, who hath survived Daniel ',' Robinson now deceased, being in the custody of the marshal of the Marshalsea of our " Lord the now King, before the King himself, of a plea [135] that he the said " William Doran render to them the said Thomas, George, William Gordon, John, and " James Farrell, the sum of fifty-four thousand pounds of lawful money of Great " Britain, which he the said William Doran owes to, and unjustly detains from them. " For that whereas the said Thomas, George, William Gordon, John, James Farrell, " and James Westerman, heretofore and in the life-time of the said James Westerman, " to wit, the first Monday in October, in the fifty-first year of the reign of our sovereign " Lord the now King, and in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and " eleven, in a certain court of our said Lord the King, called a supreme Court of Judi-'' cature, held for our said sovereign Lord the King, at the town of Saint Jago de " la Vega, in the county of Middlesex, in and for the island of Jamaica, and within " the jurisdiction of the said Court, to wit, at London, in the parish of Saint Mary-le-" Bow, in the ward of Cheap, on the day and year aforesaid, before the Honourable " John Lewis, Esquire, Chief Judge of the said Court, and his associates, then sitting " Judges of the same Court, in a certain action in the said Court brought by the said " Thomas, George, William Gordon, John, James Farrell, and James Westerman, 1278 doran v. o'reilly [1817] v dow. " against the said William Doran, and the said Daniel Robinson, for the non-perform-" ance of certain promises and undertakings by the said William Doran and Daniel, " before that time made to the said Thomas, George, William Gordon, John, James " Farrell, and James Westerman, by the consideration and judgment of the same Court " recovered against the said William Doran and the [136] said Daniel, the sum of five " thousand six hundred and seventy-five pounds two shillings and six pence current " money of Jamaica aforesaid, which in and by the said Court was then and there " adjudged to the said Thomas, George, William Gordon, John, James Farrell, and " James Westerman, for their damages which they had sustained in that behalf, and " also five pounds seven shillings of like current money for their costs and charges by " them about their suit in that behalf expended to the said Thomas, George, William " Gordon, John, James Farrell, and James Westerman, by the Court there of their own " assent adjudged ; whereof the said William Doran and Daniel were convicted, which " said judgment still remains in the said Court in full force, not in any way reversed, f annulled, paid off, or satisfied, to wit, at London...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dowse v Everard
...case that an action of debt will not lie for interest, great injustice would be done in a variety of instances: and in Doran v. O'Reilly (5 Dow, 133), in which Sea-[&5&]-man v. Dee was cited, a count for interest, in an action of debt, was held to be well laid. Here, the sum is 981. lls., t......
-
Anonymous (1816) 7 Taunt 244
... ... Interest refused on affirmance in error of a judgment in an action on a judgment of a ... If the Plaintiff below had declared in asaumpsit on the judgment ... ...
-
Doran v O'Reilly and Others
... ... in Jamaica, in which the defendant, the plaintiff in error, had suffered judgment by default. It appeared, ... that that judgment had been recovered by the defendants in error, in an action for the balance of a merchant's; ... ...