Hawkins v Wilkinson
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 11 May 1845 |
| Date | 11 May 1845 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 154 E.R. 524
IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. 17 L. J. Ex. 230, 12 Jur. 659.
534 HAWKINS V. WILKINSON 2 EX 341 hawkins v wilkinson May 11, I84n-A defendant served two consecutive summonses for leave to plead several matters, neithei of which was attended liy the plaintiff On the letiirn of the second summons, on which day the defendant's time for pleading expired, he took out and seived a thud summons, i etui liable the following day The plaintiff did not attend this summons, hut signed judg ment after it was returnable -Held, that the third summons was no stay of proceedings, ai\d that the judgment was regular [S C 17 L J Ex 230, 12 Jui 65 J] This was a tule calling on the defendant to shew cause why an ordei of Pollock, C JJ , setting aside a judgment signed by the plaintitt in this case, should uot he lescmded It appeared that, on the 8th of February, the defendant's attorney duly seived a summons to plead sevetal matters, leturnable the following day No one attended on behalf of the plaintiff, and on the 9th a second summons was seived, letuniable on the 10th, on which clay the defendant's time for pleading expned This summons being called on in its turn, and no one appearing on behalf of the plaintiff, the defendant's attorney made an affidavit of the seivice and attendance, and left it with the judge's clwk for the purpose of being signed by the judge The judge, however, left chambers without signing the affidavit, whereupon the judges clerk suggested that a third summons should be taken out, letmnable on the llth, which was accordingly clone and duly seived Nro one attended this summons on behalf of the plaintiff, and the judge, upon affidavit of the set vice and attendance, made the order to plead several matters, and the pleas were deliveied the same evening The defendant afteiwards found that the plaintitt had signed judgment on the llth, after the ham when the third summons was letuinable Aichbold shewed cause The order setting aside the [341] judgment...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Austin Friars Steamship Company v Strack
...v. Myers 16 L. T. Rep. 669 L. Rep. 2 C. P. 651 Burton v. PinkertonENR 2 Mar. Law Cas. O. S. 494 16 L. T. Rep. 419 17 L. T. Rep. 15 L. Rep. 2 Ex. 340 Ex parte Chavasse; Re GrazebrookUNK 2 Mar. Law Cas. O. S. 197 12 L. T. Rep. 249 34 L. J. 17, Bk. The JustitiaDID=ASPM 6 Asp. Mar. Law Cas. 198......
-
Palace Shipping Company v Caine
...L.JJ. Caine and Others v. Palace Steam Shipping Company Burton v. PinkertonENR 2 Mar. Law Cas. O. S. 494 (1867) 17 L. T. Rep. 15 L. Rep. 2 Ex. 340 O'Neill v. Armstrong, Mitchell, and Co.DID=ASPMELR 8 Asp. Mar. Law Cas. 8 (1895) 73 L. T. Rep. 178 (1895) 2 Q. B. 418 Sibery v. ConnellyDID=ASPM......
-
Lloyd (app.) v Sheen (resp.)
...Cas. 63 73 L. T. Rep. 178 (1895) 2 Q. B. 418 Burton v. PinkertonENR 2 Mar. Law Cas. O. S. 547 16 L. T. Rep. 419 17 L. T. Rep. 15 L. Rep. 2 Ex. 340 Merchant Shipping Act 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 60), ss. 134, 158. Seaman Wages Agreement for ordinary voyage MARITIME LAW CASES. 75 K.B.Div] LLOYD......
-
Sibery v Connelly
...Cas. 63; (1895) 2 Q. B. 70, 418; Burton v. Pinkerton, 2 Mar. Law Cas. O. S. 494, 547 (1867); 16 L. T. Rep. 419; 17L. T. Rep. 15; L. Rep. 2 Ex. 340). The magistrate was also of opinion that the appellant's breach of contract entitled the respondent to treat such breach as an end of the engag......