Dunford and Others v Trattles
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 25 January 1844 |
| Date | 25 January 1844 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 152 E.R. 1308
EXCH. OF PLEAS.
S. C. 1 D. & L. 554; 13 L. J. Ex. 124.
ditnford AND others v. TRATTLER. Exch. of Pleas. Jan. 25, 1844.-To a declaration stating that the defendant was possessed of a ship, which, by the carelessness and mismanagement of his servants, ran foul of and damaged the plaintiffs' ship, the plea of not guilty admits that the defendant was possessed of the ship, and only denies that the injury was occasioned by the carelessness, &c. of his servants. [S. C. 1 D. & L. 554 ; 13 L. J. Ex. 124.] Case. The declaration stated, that the plaintiffs were possessed of a certain ship, anil that the defendant was possessed of a certain other ship, which said ship of the defendant was under the care of the defendant's servants, who were navigating the same on the high seas. The declaration then alleged, that the defendant's ship, by the carelessness, mismanagement, &c. of his servants, ran foul of and damaged the plaintiffs' ship. : [530] Pleas, first, not guilty; second, that the plaintiffs were not possessed of the said ship. At the trial, before Wightman, J., at the last Summer Assizes for the county of Northumberland, no proof having been given by the plaintiffs that the injury was done by the defendant's vessel, it was contended, on behalf of the defendant, that the plaintiffs ought to be nonsuited. The learned Judge, however, thought that the defendant's ownership of the vessel was admitted on the pleadings, but reserved the point; and the jury having found a verdict for the plaintiffs, he gave the defendant liberty to move to enter a nonsuit. Knowles having obtained a rule accordingly, Worfcley and S. Temple now shewed cause. The question in this case arises under the pleading rule of H. T., 4 Will. 4, which provides, that, "in all actions on the case, the plea of not guilty shall operate as a denial only of the breach of duty or wrongful act alleged to have been committed by the defendant, and not of the facts stated in the inducement, and no other defence than such denial shall be admissible under that plaa." Tlje plea here pleaded, therefore, admits that the defendant was the owner of the vessel that did the injury, and merely puts in issue the fact of its having been done negligently. In. Taverner v. Little (5 Bing. N. C. 678 ; 7 Scott, 79(5), which was an action on the case against the defendant for negligently driving his horse and cart against the plaintiff's horse...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scott v Davis
...v Fearnley (1842) 3 QB 919 [ 114 ER 761]; Torrence v Gibbins (1843) 5 QB 297 [ 114 ER 1261]; Dunford v Trattles (1844) 12 M & W 529 [ 152 ER 1308]; (1844) 13 LJ Ex 124; Grew v Hill (1849) 18 LJ Ex 317; Mitchell v Crassweller (1853) 22 LJ CP 100; Salter v Walker (1869) 21 LT 360. See also W......
-
Attorney General v Ansted and Others
...long before them ; still lees is it abrogated or abridged by them, because their language plainly shews that 1308 DUNFORD V. TRATTLES 12M.&W.529. the duties are considered to be due on the warehousing entry being made by the importer. parke, B. I am of the same opinion. The defendants clear......
-
Richard Mitchell and Dorothy, his Wife, v Chrassweller and Another
...defendants' servant," clearly are not put in issue by not guilty,^ Taverner v. Little, 5 N. C. 67-8, 7 Scott, 796; .Dunford v. Tmttles, 12 M. & W. 529; Woolf v. Beard, 8 C. & P. 373; Hart v. Crowley, 12 Ad. & E. 378. [Williams, J. It is impossible to contend that the inducement here is trav......
-
Card v Case
...could not, under not gnilty, shew that he was not the person driving, and that the cart:did not belong to him. In-Dunford\. Trattles (12 M. & W. 529), it was held that the plea of not guilty to a declaration stating that the defendant was possessed cseterarum [vero] rerum quanti damnum datu......