French v Foulston
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 11 May 1771 |
| Date | 11 May 1771 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 98 E.R. 431
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
short versus john coffin, Executor of Benjamin Coffin. Monday 13th of May, 1771. A judgment against an executor de bonia propriis may be amended by making it de bonis testatoris si, &c. The Court, after taking two or three days to consider of it, were all clearly of opinion to amend a judgment against an executor, de bonis propriis, by making it de bonis testatoris, si, &c.; et de bonis propriis, si non, &c. It was after a writ of error had been brought; [2731] "in nullo est erratum " pleaded ; and an argument in the Exchequer Chamber. Mr. Davenport had moved for this amendment, upon the foot of its being only a mistake of the clerk; and had cited 2 Lev. 22, Glmpman v. Gale. Foster v. Bladcwett, 1 Barnes, 11. Blakey v. Birmingham, 2 Stra. 1132. Slicer v. Thompson, 2 Stra. 1156. Hillersdon v. Skildroy, 2 Stra. 1182. Halley v. Wenman, H. 8 G. 3, B. E. and Boothby v. Richardson, in 2 G. 3, B. E. Mr. Wallace, who opposed the amendment, denied it to be a mistake of the clerk. He said, it was a mistake in law: and this amendment would alter the essential judgment. He cited 1 Eo. Abr. title " Amendment," pa. 205, letter F, and Villars v. Parry and Moor, 1 Ld. Eaym. 182, where the Court agreed with Serjeant Levinz, " that if debt be brought against an executor, and judgment given against him de bonis propriis, this is not amendable." But Lord Mansfield delivered it as the opinion of the Court, " that this is not an error in the judgment of the Court in point of law ; but a mere mistake of the clerk:" and be repeated at large the case of Chapman v. Gale, from 2 Lev. 22, which was debt against an executor, who pleaded " plene administravit;" and verdict and judgment for the plaintiff; which was entered generally : and thereupon error was brought; and it was assigned " that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lindsay v Gibbs
...authority, insure the ship and charge the expenses against the other partners ; Sett v. Humphries (2 Stark, 345); French v. Backhmtse (5 Burr. 2727); Abbott on Shipping (page 73); d, fortiori, an owner cannot charge insurance of the ship against us who have no interest at all in the ship, a......
-
Robinson and Another, Assignees of Tata, an Insolvent Debtor, v Gleadow, Blundell, Hollingworth, and Gleadow
...the others, he cannot charge them with part of the premiums, unless the others afterwards assent to the insurance; French v. Backhouse (5 Burr. 2727). It is true that that ease turned much upon the competency of a witness, and it is equally true, that that was an action brought by the ship'......
-
Wolff and Others v Horncastle
...comes more directly within the act (d}1 Pray and Others v. Edie, 1 Term Eep. 313. (a)" Vid. French v. Backhouse, and French v. Foulston, 5 Burr. 2727. 1 BOa.*KTt. 324. WEDDALt V. BERGER 929 of Parliament than this. Who were the persons immediately concerned, who immediately employed the bro......
-
Philips against Morgan, Esq
...of this delay, further costs had been incurred, for which, he contended, the late sheriff was liable; and he cited Baban v. Plaistow (5 Burr. 2727). The Court ordered him to take 1001. for that purpose. Eule absolute. English Reports Citation: 106 E.R. 1075 IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH. Ph......