Goodwin v Parker. in C. B
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1826 |
| Date | 01 January 1826 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 89 E.R. 1
THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS
REPORTS OF CASES ARGUED and DETERMINED in the COURTS of KING'S BENCH and COMMON PLEAS, from 1670 to 1704. By the HON. RICHARD FREEMAN, late LORD CHANCELLOR of IRELAND. Second Edition. By EDWARD SMIRKE, Esq., of the Middle Temple, Barrister at Law. 1826. [The second volume of Freeman's Reports has been reprinted in the Chancery Series, and will be found in Volume 22 of the English Reports.-ed. E. R.] [1] de term S. michaeles, 1670. in communi banco. case 1. goodwin v. parker. In C. B. S. C. T. Jones, 1. Grantee of a rent reserved on a lease for years may bring debt against the lessee after attornraent. '" Robert Harison demise terres al Robert Harison demises lands to Parker per ans rendant rent et puis Parker for years rendering rent, and Harison grant cest rent al Goodwin le afterwards Harison grants this rent to lessee attorne al grant le rent est arere Goodwin; the lessee attorns to the et le grantee port action de debt pur le grant; the rent is in arrear, and the rent et fuit resolue per Curiam (absent grantee brings an action of debt for Vaughan) q' le action bien gist q' le the rent. It was resolved per Curiam attornraent de lessee ad fair in privity (absente Vaughan) that the action well de contract; (per Archer) et le case de lies when the attornment of the lessee Ards & Waikins fuit cite per ceo. Cro. has made a privity of contract; (per Eliz. 637, 651 (a). Per Wild, Action de Archer) and the case of Ards & Catkins debt bien giat pur rent seek per ans (b). was cited for this. Cro. Eliz. 637, 651. Per Wild, An action of debt well lies for a rent seek for years. (a) Vid. Gilbert on Debt, p. 386. (b) S. P. 1 Leon. 315, and Robins v. Cox, 1 Lev. 22. T. Ray. 11. 1 Keb. 1, 42, 71, 153, 250. Brownlmo v. Hewley, 1 Ld. Raym. 82. This grant of the rent separately from the reversion conveyed a rent seek to the grantee. Litt. s. 225, 226, 227. At common law such a grant was not good without attornment. Litt. s. 551. Finch's Law, 156, post, c. 45. By attornment a privity was created, which, in the case of a chattel rent, would support an action of debt. See the principal case, supra. But K. B. xviii.-1
English Reports Citation: 89 E.R. 2
THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS
2 IN COMMUNI BANCO 1 FREEMAN, 2. case 2. BusHELiAs case. In C. B. S. C. Vaugh. 135. T. Jo. 13. 6 Howell'a State Tri. 999. Petit jurors are not fineable for giving a verdict contrary to the evidence, and the direction of the Court. Bushell was impanelled upon an inquest to try an indictment against one Pen and Mede, upon a tumult and unlawful assembly ; and because the jurors did acquit contrary to their evidence, and the direction of the Court, they were fined forty marks a man, and committed till they paid the fine; and upon this Bushell brought his habeas corpus. It was argued by Nudigate, Sise, Waller, Broome, for the prisoners. Nudigate excepted against the return. 1. It is said, the jury were charged to try an issue, and there is no venue [2] alleged. 2. No place where the offence was done. 3. It doth not appear that there was any issue joined in this case. 4. It is said upon an indictment before the justices, and it doth not appear that the bill was found per probos et legates homines, and cited Sir William Withpoole's cane, Cro. Car. 134, 147. But a difference was taken between an indictment and the return of a habeas corpus, which requireth not so much certainty; and all those exceptions looked upon as immaterial (a). 5. The return is too general; for though it may be objected, that that is but defect in form, yet in this case forma dat ease; and cited Chambers'* case, Cro. Car. 133, 168, and Specot'x cast:, 5 Co. 57 ; Moore, 839. 6. To the merits of the cause. 1. It is alleged they did acquit him against the law of the land. Ans. The Court cannot judge of matter of law, unlesa the fact be first found. 2. Against full evidence. Ans. Perhaps the evidence might not be to the matter, or the jury might not give credit to the witnesses(1). 3. Against the direction of the Court. Ans. The direction of the Court cannot bind the jury ; bare attainment on the grant of a freehold rent was not a sufficient foundation for an assize, for which purpose an actual seisin of the rent was, and still is, necessary, either by payment of parcel of the rent eo nomine, or by delivery of money or some collateral thing in the name of seisin. G-ilb...
To continue reading
Request your trial