Hamond against Howell, Recorder of London
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1793 |
| Date | 01 January 1793 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 86 E.R. 1035
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, CHANCERY, COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER.
Referred to, Groenvelt v. Burwell, 1699, 1 Ld. Raym. 470; S. C. 12 Mod. 391, sub nom. Grenville v. College of Physicians. Approved, Taafe v. Downes, 1813, 3 Moo. P. C. 42 (n.). Considered and followed, Garnett v. Ferrand, 1827, 6 B. & C. 625; Kemp v. Neville, 1861, 10 C. B. N. S. 550.
case 130. hamond against hovvell, Recorder of London. [Referred to, Groenvelt v. Burwell, 1699, 1 Ld. Raym. 470; S. C. 12 Mod. 391, sub nom. Grenville v. College of Physicians. Approved, Taafe v. Dowries, 1813, 3 Moo. P. C. 42 (n.). Considered and followed, Garnett v. Ferrand, 1827, 6 B. & C. 625; Kemp v. Neville, 1861, 10 C. B. N. S. 550.] An action will not lie against a Judge for what he doth judicially, though erroneously.-S. C. 1 Mod. 119, 184. False imprisonment.-The defendant pleads specially. The substance of which was, that there was a commission of oyer and tenniner directed to him amongst others, fee. and that before him and the other commissioners Mr. Penn and Mr. Mead, two preachers, were indicted for being at a conventicle; to which indictment they pleaded not guilty ; and this was to be tried by a jury, whereof the plaintiff was one ; and that after the witnesses were sworn and examined in the cause, he and his fellows found the prisoners, Penn arid Mead, not guilty, whereby they were acquitted : et quia the plaintiff male se gesserit in acquitting them both against the direction of the Court in matter of law and against plain evidence, the defendant and the other commissioners then on the Bench fined the jury forty marks a-piece, and for non-payment committed them to Newgate, &c.-The plaintiff replies de injurid sud proprid, absque hoc that he and his fellows acquitted Penn and Mead against evidence: and to this the defendant demurred. Goodfellow, Serjeant, who would have argued for the defendant, said, that he (ft) Eeg. 295. (i) By 20 Geo. 2, c. 37, all sheriffs shall, at the expiration of their office, turn over to the succeeding sheriff, by indenture and schedule, all such writs and process as shall remain in their hands unexecuted, who shall duly execute and return the same, &c. 1036 EASIER TERM, 29 CAR. 2. IN C. B. 2 MOD. 219. would not offer to speak to that point, whether a Judge can fine a jury for giving a verdict contrary to evidence, since the case was so lately and solemnly resolved by all the...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Sirros v Moore
...576. Garnett v. Ferrand (1827) 6 B. & C. 611. Gwinne v. Poole (1692) 2 Lut.App. 1560. Hamond v. Howell (1674) 1 Mod. 119, 184; (1677) 2 Mod. 218. Houlden v. Smith (1850) 14 Q.B. 841. Le Caux v. Eden (1781) 2 Doug.K.B. 594. London Corporation v. Cox (1867) L.R. 2 H.L. 239, H.L.(E.). Mars......
-
Tughan v Craig
...55. (7) 26 Ch. Div. 306. (1) 11 Q. B. D. 588, 599, 601. (2) [1914] 2 K. B. 588. (3) 2 Ir. C. L. 460. (1) 3 B. & C. 656. (2) 12 Rep. 24. (3) 2 Mod. 218. (1) 1 Mod. (2) 1 Mod. 184. (3) 6 B. & C. 625. (4) 2 I. C. L. Rep. 460. (5) 2 Mod. 218. (6) 12 Rep. 24. (1) Mr. Hatchell's report is procura......
-
Dicas v Lord Brougham
...refused to convict William Penn of an unlawful assembly in Gracechurch Street." (Note by reporters, 6 C. & 1. 258.) (c) 1 Mod. 184, and 2 Mod. 218. 581] Dicas against Lord Brougham, 1833. [582 dieted for a riot, and the Court directed the jury, if they believed the evidence, to find the......
-
Houlden v Smith
...at the Bar in Pidoris case (30 Howell's State Trials, 225, 751); and it has always been the practice to plead specially. In Hamond v. Hmaell (2 Mod. 218), Groenvdt v. Burwell (1 Ld. Raym. 454), and Taaffe v. Downes (3 Moore's Privy Council Cases, 28, note (a)), the defence was specially ple......