Gordon v Calvert
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 22 May 1828 |
| Date | 22 May 1828 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 38 E.R. 924
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
[581] gordon . galveet. May 21, 22,1828. B. being hired as a clerk to A. and Co., but not for any definite period, C. and V. joined with him in a bond to secure his duly accounting for his assets ; 0. died, and his executrix gave a written notice to A. and Co., that she would no longer remain surety ; A. and Co. communicated this notice to B., and required and obtained from him the bond of another surety ; D. died, and also the new surety ; and, four years and a half after the death of C., B. died, when deficiencies were found in his accounts, subsequent to the notice : Held, that the executrix of C. had no equity to restrain A. and Co., from proceeding at law on the bond. Felix Calvert and Co., having agreed to take Richard Edwards into their service as collecting clerk, but not for any definite period, he, together with Gordon and Kent, in May 1820, executed a joint and several bond to two of the partners, for the penal sum of 2000, with a condition to be void, if he Edwards ahould, from time to time and at all times during his continuance in the service of the firm, duly account for all his receipts. Gordon died on the 31st of October 1821 ; and his executrix shortly afterwards sent to Calvert and Co. a letter, informing them of his death, and stating that she would no longer remain surety for Edwards. To thia letter Calvert and Co., returned no answer : but they shewed it to Edwards, and required from him further security; and, in January 1822, James Ives Edwards executed to them a bond for the same penal sum, and with the same condition as the first bond. This second bond recited the first, and purported to be given as an additional and further security. Kent died, and also James Ives EUwardu ; but no further security was required by Calvert and Ooi 4EUSS. 582. WHITE V. VITTY 925 In 182G Richard Edwards died ; and it was then discovered, that there were deficiencies in his accounts to the amount of upwards of 1700, principally in respect of sums received by him after January 1822. An action being brought on the bond against the executrix of Gordon, she filed her bill, and obtained the common injunction. The Defendants afterwards put [582] in their answer, admitting the facts as above stated, but denying that they ever intended to release Gordon's estate, or that the bond of James Ives Ed-wards was taken otherwise than as an additional security; and upon this answer the V'ice-Chancellor dissolved the injunction (2 Sim. 253). The Plaintiff now moved before the Lord...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Munster and Leinster Bank v France
...M. & W. 828. Pring v. ClarksonENR 1 B. & C. 14. Twopenny v. YoungENR 3 B. & C. 208. Eyre v. EverettENR 2 Russ. 381. Gordon v. CalvertENR 4 Russ. 581. Boaler v. MayorENR 19 C. B. (N. S.) 76. Wykie v. RogersUNK 1 D. G. M. & G. 408, 414. Bell v. BanksUNK 3 M. & G. 258. Sharpe v. GibbsENR 16 C.......
-
Williams v Sir C. M. Burrell, Bart., and Another
...Bac. Abr. Executors (P.), 1, referring to Bro. Abr. tit. Cov. pi. 12. (a)1 Citing Quick v. Ludtturrow, 3 Bulstr. 29; Gordon v. Calvert, 2 Sim. 253, 4 Euss. Ch. Cas. 581. (5) Citing Co. Litt. 209 a.; Wentw. Off. Ex., 14th edit. c. 11, pp. 239, 240. (a)* Co. Litt. 389 a.; Hob. 3. 1 C. B. 430.......
-
Horler v Carpenter
...either at law or in equity discharge himself from that obligation : Culvert v. Gordon, 7 B. & C. 809, 1 M. & E. 497; Gordon v. Calvert, 4 Russ. 581,1 Sim. 253. In Ford v. Tiley, 6 B. & C. 325, by agreement, A. stipulated that he would, as soon as he should become possessed of a certain publ......