Hannah Maria Trulock v John Robey
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 19 November 1841 |
| Date | 19 November 1841 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 59 E.R. 1186
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
See Richardson v. Younge, 1870, L. R. 10 Eq. 278. S. C. on Bill of Review, 15 Sim. 265, 2 Ph. 395; 41 E. R. 995, which decision was questioned in Green v. Jenkins, 1860, 6 Jur. (N. S.) 515.
Statute of Limitations, 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27. Acknowledgment. Mortgagor and Mortgagee Equity of Redemption. Agent.
[402] hannah maria trulock v. john robey. Nov. 19, 1841. [See Richardson v. Yawge, 1870, L. E. 10 Eq. 278. S. C. on Bill of Review, 15 Sim. 265, 2 Ph. 395; 41 E. R. 995, which decision was questioned in Grem v. Jenkins, 1860, 6 Jur. (N. S.) 515.] Statute of Limitations, 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27. Acknowledgment. Mortgagor and Mortgagee. Equity of Redemption. Agent. A mortgagee in possession of lands at Hendred having received from the grandfather of the infant heir of the mortgagee a letter, the contents of which did not appear, wrote in answer as follows:-"Concerning the business at Hendred, which you know nearly as well as myself, as there has been nothing kept from you ; which I am very willing to settle if your granddaughter is of age. I never told you any otherways; as I have been informed she is the heiress of what there is. The difference is not worth much. I shall hear from your granddaughter about the business." Held, that the last-mentioned letter was an acknowledgment of the heir's right to redeem the mortgage, and that, when she came of age, she was 13 SIM. KB. TBULOCK V. ROBEY 1187 entitled to consider her grandfather as having acted as her agent, and, consequently, that she was entitled to redeem the mortgage at any time within 20 years after the letter was written. In December 1767 Richard Hutchins, the Plaintiff's great-grandfather, made a mortgage in fee of a copyhold estate, held of the manor of East Hendred in Berkshire. In October 1774 the mortgage was transferred to John Robey the elder; and, soon afterwards, he was admitted to and entered into possession of the mortgaged premises, and continued in possession of them until his death. Hutehins, the mortgagor, died in 1776; and the equity of redemption of the mortgaged premises descended to his three daughters, Ellen, Hannah and Mary. Ellen afterwards died intestate and without issue, leaving her sisters, Mary and Hannah, her customary co-heirs. In October 1804 Hannah sold and surrendered her moiety of the equity of redemption to John Eobey the elder, in fee. Mary married John Trulock the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stansfield and Others, on behalf, Company v Hobson
...not a sufficient acknowledgment of the mortgagor's title or right of redemption within the 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27, s. 28. Trulock v. Robey (12 Sim. 402); Hodle v. Healey (G Madd. 185); Batchelor v. Middleton (6 Hare, 75); Hyde v. Johnson (2 Bing. N. C. 776), were cited. the master of the roll......
-
Stansfield v Hobson
...and that the correspondence contained a sufficient acknowledgment to take the case out of the statutes. They cited Trulock v. Eobey (12 Sim. 402). Mr. Roundell Palmer and Mr. Hamilton Humphreys, for the Appellant. The case does not come within the exception, unless the acknowledgment is giv......
-
Batchelor v Middleton
...such possession. Mr. Komilly and Mr. Heathfield, for the Defendants. The cases of Lucas v. Dennison (13 Sim. 584) and Trulook v. Robey (12 Sim. 402) were cited. [83] the vice-chancellor [Sir James Wigram]. In this case the bill is filed by the mortgagor to redeem two different estates. In r......
-
Harty v Davis
...v. Power 5 Ir. Law Rep. 494. Kemmis v. acklin 11 Ir. Law Rep. 372. Incorporated Society v. Richards 1 D. & W. 258. Trulock v. obyENR 12 Sim. 402. Christon v. BrophyUNK 10 Ir. Eq. Rep. 139. Rawson v. Moore 2 J. & S. 601. Latouche v. Oƒ€™BrienUNK 10 Ir. Eq. Rep. 113. CASES AT LAW. 23 H. ......