Elkington v Holland
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 18 April 1842 |
| Date | 18 April 1842 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 152 E.R. 278
EXCHEQUER OF PLEAS.
S. C. 1 Dowl. (N. S.) 643; 11 L. J. Ex. 273; 6 Jur. 374. Applied, Stokes v. Trumper, 1855, 2 K. & J. 244.
elkington v. holland. Exch. of Pleas. April 18, 1842.-A warrant of attorney was attested in the following form : "Signed, sealed, and delivered by J. A,, in my presence, and I subscribe myself as attorney for the said J. A., expressly named by him to attest his execution of these presents : "-Held, by Alderson, B., to be insufficient; Parke, B., dubitante.- But, assuming such attestation to be had, held, that it was not such gross negligence as to preclude the attorney of tie creditor from recovering his charges in respect of the warrant of attorney, it Having been set aside as defective. [S. C. 1 Dowl. (N. S.) G43; 11 L. J. Ex. 273 ; 6 Jur. 374. Applied, Stokes v. Trumpet; 1855, 2 K. & J. 244. This was an action for work and labour as an attorney. The defendant pleaded the general issue, At the trial before Lord Abinger, C. B., at the last Assizes for the county of Warwick, it appeared that the plaintiff, having been applied to by the defendant to advise him as to the best mode of securing a debt due to the defendant from one Ankers, recommended that a warrant of attorney should be given by Ankers, and 9M.&W. 660. ELKINGTON V. HOLLAND 279 drew up a form for it, together with the attestation ; which latter was in the following words :-" Signed, sealed and delivered by the said Joseph Ankers in my presence, and I subscribe myself as attorney for the said Joseph Ankers, expressly named by him to attest his execution of these presents." The warrant of attorney was signed by Ankers, and attested by his attorney, who subscribed himself as " John M. Underbill, attorney, No. 110, New-street, Birmingham." By an order of Alderson, B., this warrant of attorney was set aside, on the ground that it was defective in not containing an express declaration by the attesting witness of his being the attorney for the defendant, according to the provisions of 1 & 2 Viet. c. 110, s. 9: and the defendant, who had seized in execution arid sold the [660] goods of Ankers under a judgment entered upon a warrant of attorney, was compelled to refund the amount to the assignees of Ankers, who had become bankrupt. It was contended at the trial of this cause, that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover the costs of preparing the warrant of attorney, on the ground that the instrument had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wilbraham v Snow
...be deducted. So in trover for title deeds, the jury may give damages to the amount of the full value of the estate to which they belong. 9 M. & W. 659, Loosemore v. Radford. So in trover for a bill of exchange, the plaintiff is entitled to recover the value of the bill at the time of the co......
-
Hunter v Caldwell
...in each particular instance : and here the defendant shewed that he was well acquainted with the practice. In Elkington v. Holland (9 M. & W. 659), the Judges of the Court of Exchequer differed as to the sufficiency of an attestation to a warrant of attorney, so that it might well be held (......
-
Everard and Another against Poppleton and Another
...might perhaps be [183] inferred from the language of Coleridge J. in Poole v. Hobbs (8 Dowl. P. C. 113): but in Elkington v. Holland (9 M. & W. 659), Parke B. said that the Act " does not state the precise terms that are to be used, but merely the substance :" on which point there appears t......
-
Stokes v Trumper
...of an annuity, which was subsequently held to be a defect upon a very doubtful construction of the statute." In ElEngton v. Holland (9 M. & W. 659, 661, 662), where one of two Judges doubted as to the sufficiency of an attorney's attestation, it was held by both that, even if insufficient, ......