Hoare v Peck
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 09 March 1833 |
| Date | 09 March 1833 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 58 E.R. 514
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
Pleading. Demurrer. Statue of Limitations.
514 HOABE V. PECK. 6 SIM. 80. of the late James Atkinson, brother of my late grandmother, Jane Fox, the other half part or share of my said rest and residue of money or trust estate, namely, one-third of the said part or share to the representative or representatives of Mary, daughter of the said James Atkinson ; one other third of the said part or share unto the representatives of Betty, daughter of the said James Atkinson; the other remaining third of the said part or share to the representatives of Joyce, daughter of the aaid James Atkinson." [50] The bill was filed by the administrator of the testatrix with her will annexed (who was one of her next of kin), against her co-heirs and certain persons claiming to be the next of kin of two of the sisters of E. Fox, praying that the will might be established, the trusts performed, and the rights and interests of the Plaintiff and all other parties, to and in the testatrix's residuary trust estate, ascertained and declared. Mr. Knight and Mr. Simons, for the Plaintiff, said that it appeared, by the context of the will, that the testatrix, by " representatives " meant " descendants." And, the vice-chancellor being of that opinion referred it to the Master to inquire and state how many brothers and sisters the testatrix's late father had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Prance v Sympson
...remedy is barred by the Statute of Limitations. The objection may be raised by demurrer: Foster v. Hodgson (19 Ves. 180), Hoare v. Peck (6 Sim. 51). [the vice-chancellor. I think that is settled, at least so that I cannot alter the practice.] There is no sufficient acknowledgment in this ca......
-
Ex parte Harrison
...the argument of that ease, some doubt was expressed by the counsel for the plaintiff as to the coFreetness of the report of Hoare v. Peck, 6 Sim. 51, upon the authority of which the demurrer in Plunket v. Bwhngton was put in but upon reference to the registrar's book that report was found t......
-
Norman v Stiby
...of suit accrued more than six years before the filing of the bill, a Defendant need not plead the statute, but may demur; Hoare v. Peck (6 Simons, 51). The statute commenced running in 1812, on the death of Young, since which time there has not been any acknowledgment or payment of interest......
-
Hemphill v M'Kenna
...2 Ir. Eq. Rep. 228. Whitelegg v. WhiteleggUNK 1 B. C. C. 57. Morris v. Kelly 1 J. & W. 481. Rex v. BarrENR 4 Camp. 16. Hoare v. PeckENR 6 Sim. 51. Lord bath v. Sherwin Pre. Ch. 261. Fitton v. Maccless-field 1 Ver. 287. Earl of Darlington v. BowesENR 1 Eden. 270. caseENR 1 Ves. sen. 476. Chu......