Gaters, Executor of Elizabeth Robinson, Deceased v Madeley
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1840 |
| Date | 01 January 1840 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 151 E.R. 477
EXCH. OF PLEAS.
S. C. 9 L. J. Ex. 173; 4 Jur. 724. Followed, Fleet, v. Perrius, 1869, L. R. 4 Q. B. 500.
gaters, Executor of Elizabeth Robinson, Deceased . maueley. Exch. of Pleas. 1840.-The interest in a promissory note given to a wife during coverture, the consideration for which was money advanced by her during the coverture, survives to the wife after the death of her husband, unless he reduces it into possession in his lifetima [S. C. !) L. J. Ex. 173 ; 4 Jur. 724. Followed, Fleet v. Pemus, 1869, L. R. 4 Q. B. 500.J Assumpsit on a promissory note. The tirst count stated, that the defendant, in the lifetime of the said Elizabeth Robinson, to wit, on the 25th March, 1833, made his promissory note in writing, and delivered the same to the said Elizabeth Robinson, and thereby promised to pay to her the said Elizabeth Robinson on demand the sum of 20, and thereupon, in consideration of the premises, promised the said Elizabeth Roliinson to pay her the said note according to the tenor and effect thereof. The second count atated, that in the lifetime of the said E. R., to wit, on Sic., the defendant made his certain other promissory note in writing, and delivered the same to the said E. R., and thereby promised to pay the said E. R. 20 on demand; and afterwards, and after the death of the said E. R., to wit, on the 1st day of December, 1838, the defendant, in consideration of the premises, promised the plaintiff, as such executor as aforesaid, to pay him the said note according to the tenor and effect thereof. Plea, that the promissory note in the first count mentioned, and the promissory note in the second count metitioned, were one and the same ; and that the said promissory [424] note in those counts mentioned, was made and delivered by the defendant to the said Elizabeth Robinson as in those counts is mentioned, whilst she the said Elizabeth Robinson was covert, and the wife of one John Robinson, since deceased ; and that the consideration for the making of the said tiote by the defendant 478 GAT1BS V. MADELEY 6M.ftW. 5. was money advanced by the said Elizabeth Robinaon, whilst she was the wife of the said John Robinson, to the defendant, and that the said Elizabeth Robinson, in her lifetime! was not executrix or administratrix, neither is the plaintiff' the executor or administrator, of the said John Robinson; and the defendant further saitlr, that he...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Forth and Others v Stanton, Widow
...case the Master of the Rolls [Sir Thos. Plumer] treated the note aa a chose. in action. [See also 2 B. & Ad. 447, Richards v. Richards. 6 M. & W. 423, Outers v. Madely; which authorities are decisive in favour of the wife's right, by survivorship, to a note made to her during coverture, (th......
-
Talbot v Cody
...Mulvy v. RobbUNK 4 D. F. & J. 264. Warriner v. RogersELR L. R. 16 Eq. 340. Philliskirk v. Pluckwell 2 M. & Sel. 393. Gaters v. MaddelyENR 6 M. & W. 423. Christ's Hospital v. BudginENR 2 Vern. 683. Nash v. NashUNK 2 Mad. 133. Dummer v. PitcherENR 5 Sim. 35; 2 M. & K. 262. Low v. CarterENR 1 ......
-
Burnham v Bennett
...the wife was entitled to it by survivorship : Nash v. Nash (2 Madd. 133), Philliskirk v. Pluckwell (2 M. & S. 393), Gaters v. Madeley (6 M. & W. 423). Mr. Swanston, amicus curice, referred to Wombwell v. Laver (2 Sim. 560; see Oglander v. Baston, 1 Vern. 396; Hansen v. Miller, 8 Jur. 209, 3......
-
Lee and Wife v Patrick Hayes
...M'Neilage v. HollowayENR 1 B. & Ald. 218. Purdew v. JacksonENR 1 Russ. 66. Sherrington v. YatesENR 12 M. & W. 855. Gaters v. "MadeleyENR 6 M. & W. 423. Halloran v. ThompsonENR 8 Ir. Jur., N. S. 332, and 14 Ir. Com. Law Rep. 334. Hammond v. Dayson 15 Law Jour., Exch. 278. M'Dougal v. Roberts......