Heath v Nesbitt
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 08 June 1843 |
| Date | 08 June 1843 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 152 E.R. 973
EXCHEQUER OF PLEAS.
S. C. 12 L. J. Ex. 408; 7 Jur. 586.
heath v. nesbitt. Kxch. of Pleas. June 8, 1,S4;!.-Although on an application to rescind a Judge's order made under I & 2 Viet. c. 110, for the arrest of a defendant, or for refusing to discharge him out of custody, either party, on cause being 97*4 THE ATTORNEV-GENERAL V. ROGERS 11M.&W.670. shewn, may produce additional affidavits; yet those used before the Judge at chambers ought to be brought before the Court. [S. C. 12 L. J. Ex. 408 ; 7 Jur. 5S(!.] A rule had been obtained, calling on the plaintiff to shew cause- why two orders of'Gurney, B, one for the defendant's arrest under 1 & '2 Viet. c. 110, s. 3, and the other refusing his discharge under s. (i, should not be rescinded, and the defendant be discharged out of custody. It appeared that the rule had been obtained upon fresh affidavits, and that those used before the learned Judge in support of the application at Chambers were not brought before the Court. W. H. Watson, on shewing cause, took a preliminary objection, that, as this application was in the nature of an appeal from the decision of the Judge, the affidavits used before him ought to be brought before the Court, to enable the Court to see whether or no the learned Judge had properly exercised his discretion in making the orders. Per Curiam.(tt) Although additional affidavits...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Underhill v Devereux
...fresh affidavits may be used on both sides; 1L M. & W. 173 ; but the former affidavits ought also to be brought before the Court. 11 M. & W. 669, Heath v. Nesbit. 4 Scott, N. R. 773, Needham v. Bristow. 4 Mann. & Gr. 262, S. C. However, a motion may be made under the sixth section of the st......