Henshall against Roberts and Others, in Error
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 08 May 1804 |
| Date | 08 May 1804 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 102 E.R. 1026
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
[150] henshall against egberts and others, in error. -Tuesday, May 8th, 1804. A count upon an account stated with the plaintiff's executrix, &c. (not saying as execiitrix, &c.) cannot be joined with counts on promises to the testator; for it is no allegation that the promises were made to the plaintiffs in their representative capacity; and under such a count proof might be given of an account stated with them in their individual characters. Qu. Whether if it had been laid to be on an account stated with the plaintiffs themselves, though named as executrix, &e. it could be so joined, as the cause of action would still appear to have arisen in the time of the executrix, &e., though the money, when recovered, would be assets ? S. Henshall was attached to answer Sarah Eoberts and others, executrix and executors of the last will and testament of William Eoberts deceased, which W. E. was executor, &c. of W. Danson, of a plea of trespass on the case, &c. For that whereas the defendant Henshall in the lifetime of Danson was indebted to Danson in (a) Vide Frontmv. Small, 1 Stra. 705. 2 Ld. Bay. 1418. Macbeath v. Haldimand, 1 Term Eep. 172; and Unwin v. Wolesley, ib. 674. Vide also White v. Cuyler, 6 Term Eep. 176, and Wilkes v. Back, 2 East, 142. 5 EAST, 151. HENSHALL V. ROBERTS . 1027 5001. for goods sold and delivered by Danson in his lifetime to the defendant Henshall at his request, he the defendant, in consideration thereof, promised Danson in his lifetime to pay him, &c. There were various other counts upon promises made by the defendant to Danson in his lifetime. Another set of counts was upon promises to the plaintiffs below, the executors of the executor, the flrst of which stated that whereas the defendant Henshall afterwards and in the lifetime of Danson and of W. .Roberts respectively was indebted to Danson in other 5001. for goods sold and delivered by Danson in his lifetime to the defendant at his request, and being so indebted, the defendant in consideration thereof afterwards, and after the decease of Danson and Wm. Roberts respectively promised the said Sarah, &c. (the plaintiffs below) executrix and executors as aforesaid to pay to them the said sum when requested. The declaration also contained the two following counts : " And whereas the defendant Henshall afterwards, &c. accounted with the said Sarah, &c. (the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Coryton and Another v Lithebye
...it was held in error after judgment by nil dicit and a writ of inquiry and final judgment that those two counts could not be joined. 5 East, 150, Henshall v. Boberts.(n) So a plaintiff shall not have an action against another, to charge him as executor, and also in hia own right; for the ju......
-
John Kean and Jane His Wife, Administratrix of William Craig, v James Strong and Others, Executors of John Maxwell
...1 Salk. 139. Rubery v. JervoisENR 1 T. R. 229. Norris v. Elsworth Freem. 462. Cowell v. WattsENR 6 East, 405. Henshall v. RobertsENR 5 East, 150. Gye v. Ellis Stra. 228. Cocks v. Nash 2 M. & Se. 434. 540 CASES AT LAW. T. T. 1843. Queen'sBench. :April 28. May 2, 3. JAMES STRONG and others, e......
-
Ferguson and Another, Assignees v Mitchell
...as assignees, otherwise it does not appear in what capacity they sue : Brig/ten v. Parkas (2 Bos. & P. 424), Hens/uill, v. Robert* (5 East, 150). In Cobbett v. Cochrane (8 Bing. 17 ; I Moo. & Sc. 45), a breach in non-payment to the plaintiffs, assignees as aforesaid, was held sufficient; bu......
-
Elizabeth Biddell, Widow, against Mary Dowse
...deprive a defendant of the opportunity of pleading plene administravit, Brigden [262] v. Parkes (2 B. & P. 424), Henshall v. Roberts (5 East, 150). It is not even alleged, that Biddell lived until the arbitrator took upon himself the burden of the arbitration, or that the executor ever knew......