Dowling and Others, Executors of Bernard Dowling, Deceased v Ford
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 21 April 1843 |
| Date | 21 April 1843 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 152 E.R. 829
EXCH. OF PLEAS.
S. C. 12 L. J. Ex. 342.
[3291 dowling and others, Executors of Bernard Bowling, Deceased v. ford. Exch. of Plfias. April 21, 1843.-N. having applied to B. for a loan of £300 on mortgage, D., doubting the sufficiency of the security, refused to advance it without having, in addition, a joint and several promissory note for £50 from N. and one P., payable on demand. The note and mortgage were accordingly given, the latter containing a covenant by N. to pay the sum of £300 and interest at 5 per cent. Several half-yearly payments of 71. I Os. each for interest having been made by N.:-Held, in an action against F. upon the note, that such payments by N. kept all the securities alive, and prevented the operation of the Statute of Limitations as to the note. [S. C. 12 L. J. Ex. 342.] Assumpsit an a promissory note for £50, payable on demand by the defendant to the plaintiffs' testator, with a count upon an account stated with the testator, and a third count on an account stated with the executors since his decease. Pleas, to the first count, that the defendant did not make the note; to the second and third counts, non assumpsit; and to the whole declaration, actio non accrevit infra aex annos, which last plea was traversed by the replication. At the trial before Maule, J., at the last Spring Assizes at Chester, it appeared that in the year 1835, one Joseph Nodin, being desirous of borrowing the sum of £300 on mortgage of certain property, applied to Mr. Bowling, the testator, to advance him that sum, but the latter, having viewed the property proposed to be mortgaged, arid doubting the value of it to be sufficient, declined to advance the money without further 830 DOWLLNG V. FORD 11M. *W. 330. security, and the defendant agreed to join Nodin in a joint and several promissory note for £50, with interest at £5 per cent., to make up the deficiency, if any should arise, and as a collateral security for so much of the £300 as was considered insufficiently secured by the deed. The £300 was accordingly paid to Nodin, and the mortgage executed by him, and the note in question given. The mortgage was dated the llth of November, 1835, and was from Nodin to Dowling, for securing £300, and the deed contained a covenant by Nodin to pay the principal arid interest. The note '. was a joint and several note made by the defendant and Nodin...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nash v Hodgson
...Afkinx v. Tred-yold (2 B. & C. 23), Tippets v. Heane (1 Cr. Mees. & K. 252), Waters v. Tompkins (2 Cr. Mees. & B. 723), Dmvling v. Ford (11 M. & W. 329), Scholey v. Walton (12 M. & W. 510), Oleave v. Jones (6 Exch. 573), and BamfieU v. Tupper (7 Exch. 27), he arrived ultimately at the same ......
-
Hinds v Blacker and Coffey
...6 M. & G. 851. Isaacson v. HarwoodELR L. R. 3 Ch. App. 225. Jackson v. North Eastern Railway CompanyELR 7 Ch. D. 573. Dowling v. FordENR 11 M. & W. 329. Slim v. CroucherENR 2 Giff. 37; 1 D. F. & Jo. 518. Wilson v. Lady DunsanyENR 18 Beav. 293. Dymond v. CroftELR 3 Ch. D. 512. Marryat v. Mar......
-
In Teh Matter of The Estate of The Earl of Kingston, Owner and Petitioner:
...IN TEH MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF THE EARL OF KINGSTON, OWNER AND PETITIONER: Jackson v. WoolleyENR 8 El. & Bl. 778. Dowling v. FordENR 11 M. & W. 329. Mahon v. Davoren 2 H. & B. 523. Warrens v. O'Shee 5 L. R. N. S. 77; S. C. on appeal, 1 Jebb & Symea, 504. Kelly v. Kelly 6 L. R. N. S. 222. Vi......