Hunt against Bate
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1794 |
| Date | 01 January 1794 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 73 E.R. 605
King's Bench Division
easier term, 10 queen elizabeth. hunt against bate. The servant of A. is arrested, B. bails him, and afterwards A. promises for this friendship to save him harmless, this is no good consideration for the assu/m^sit. Secus, had A. requested, and the bailing been after the promise. (31) The servant of a man was arrested, and imprisoned in the ^ e. ;i, 35 i . Hob. liifi. Note the report supra, (31) Hil. 36. Eliz. C. B. ^ Harris' cane. Action on the case, in q. a. ;ind3."'VidKhoiiBs, consideration that the plaintiff, at the request of the defendant, had uu^'^'''''^'.,"; f' taken such a one apprentice, the defendant undertook that he should BiUn.'7:'.._ i'.) Eliz. ms b. serve truly, &c. and adjudged that this is a good consideration, 'iV'dde^not ii upon a although it were passed, because it was at the request of the i-onsideratum p;i-t. Ur. ,& t ' 1 St. KM, [0.1. ,j(!o. 87. defendant. h. r,, u. -27 ft. s, -2n. And E. 38. Eliz. C. B. £ Foster's case. In consideration of one ^ Vi^rJ'oro^iO!)1 hundred and ten pounds given to a stranger at the instance of the sitiuwtv. is,. Unii. lots. defendant, the defendant undertook; and adjudged a good con- hmi'."'Dig. ill'' i^nJcJ sideration, although it was passed, because ifc was at the instance of ^nm^'u./''1' see'uuu'1t the defendant. 101, note t'.'i 606 EASTER TERM, 10 QUEEN ELIZABETH 2DYEE,272b. Compter in London for a trespass; and he was let to mainprize by the manucaptiori of two citizens of London (who were well acquainted with the master), in consideration that the business of the master should not go undone. And afterwards, before judgment and condemnation, the master upon the said friendly consideration promised and undertook to one of the mainpernors to save him harmless against the party plaintiff from all damages and costs if any should be adjudged, as happened afterwards in reality; whereupon the surety was compelled to pay the condemnation, s. thirty-one pounds, &c. And thereupon he brought an action on the case, and the undertaking was traversed by the master, and found in London at nisi prims against him. And now in arrest of judgment it was moved that the action does not lie. And by the opinion of the Court it does not lie in this matter, because there is no consideration wherefore the defendant should be charged for the debt of his servant, unless the master had first promised to discharge the plaintiff before the enlargement, and mainprize made of his servant, for the master did never make [272 b] request to the plaintiff for his servant to do so much, but he did it of his own head, Wherefore &c. [A. in consideration that (32) But in another like action on the case brought upon a B. has married his v ' & v daughter at his request, promises to pay twenty (32) But H. 42. Eliz. C. B. Halifax...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cardinal against Sackford
...E.R. 605" class="content__heading content__heading--depth1"> English Reports Citation: 73 E.R. 605 King's Bench DivisionLilley against Whitney Li l ley against whitney. A termor grants all his term and interest to B. habemhun to him after his death ; the whole interest passes immediately, a......