Dyster against Battye and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1820 |
| Date | 01 January 1820 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 106 E.R. 727
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
SB. &ALD.C49. : DYSTER V. BATTYE 727 dystee against battye AND another. 1820. To a declaration in an action on the case founded in tort, a plea of not guilty of the grievances mentioned in declaration within six years, is bad upon special demurrer. The declaration stated, that before the committing of the grievances by the defendants therein after mentioned, the defendants, as brokers or factors, had in their custody and possession certain goods and merchandizes, to wit, 3000 hides, belonging to persons trading under the firm of Graham, Rigg, and Co., and that defendants had requested the plaintiff to accept and pay two several bills of exchange, amounting together to 25001., drawn by the defendants upon him, and to sell the hides and ap-[449]-ply the proceeds towards the repayment of the amount of the bills. It then stated, that the defendants, intending to deceive the plaintiff, and to induce him to accept and pay the said bills, wrongfully, fraudulently, and deceitfully represented to the plaintiff, that the hides were the proper goods and merchandizes of them, the defendants, and that they delivered and deposited the same with the plaintiff for the purpose of the same being sold and the proceeds thereof applied as aforesaid, whereas, in truth, they were not, and the defendants well knew them hot to be the proper goods and merchandizes of :them, the defendants ; but that the same were in their custody as brokers or factors only. It then averred, that the plaintiff, by means of the aforesaid representation, was induced to accept, and actually did accept the bills, and paid the same when due to the holders, and that afterwards, having sold the said goods and merchandizes, a certain action was commenced by Graham, Eigg, and Co. against the plaintiff for the recovery of the proceeds, in which action they recovered judgment for 16451. the amount of the proceeds, and 741. for costs, whereby the plaintiff hath lost the security of the said goods and merchandizes for the re-payment of the amount of the bills, and had been forced to pay to Graham, Kigg, and Co. the sum adjudged to be paid to them, and hath also been forced to expend other monies in and about defending the said suit so prosecuted against him. Plea, first, not guilty of the said supposed grievances; secondly, that the defendants were not guilty of the said supposed grievances in the said...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hodsden against Harridge
...and may either mean within six years of the act done, or of the consequences of that act, which latter constitutes the cause of action. 3 B. & A. 448, Oyster v. Battye. 16 East, 215, Roberts v. Read. But in assumpsit, the breach of contract is the cause of action and not the consequential d......
-
Joseph Pratt, Administrator of Ann Pratt, against Swaine
...have accrued to the plaintiff as administrator as aforesaid within that period. i Chitty in support of the demurrer. Dyster v. Batty (3 B. &, A. 448), shews that to a declaration in an action on the ease a plea of not guilty of the grievances within six years is bad on special demurrer; and......
-
Mary Anne Quinn v Harriette Wilson
...Cr. & J. 361. Lumby v. Allday 1 Cr. & Jer. 501. Ayre v. Craven 2 A. & E. 2. Doyley v. RobertsENR 3 Bing. N. C. 835. Dyster v. BattyeENR 3 B. & Ald. 448. Pratt v. SwaineENR 8 B. & C. 285. Sullivan v. White 6 Ir. Law Rep. 42. Lumby v. Allday 1 Cr. & Jer. 301. Ayre v. Craven 4 Nev. & Man. 220.......
-
Beresford v Loughnan
...1 Lord Raym, 120. Spiers v. ParkerENR 1 T. R. 141. Gill v. ScrivensENR 7 T. R. 27. Vavasour v. Ormrod 6 B. & Cr. 430. Dyster v. BattyeENR 3 B. & A. 448. Chandler v. Roberts Doug. 60. Milner v. Crowdall Shower, 338. Brett v. Rigden 1 Plowd. Rep. 342. Obin v. Knott Fortesc. 339. Hayman v. Ger......