John Seabourne and Thomas Seabourne, Plaintiffs George Powel, Thomas Seabourne Senior, Alice Austin the Wife of Joseph Austin, William Mackley, and Judith his Wife, Defendants
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 08 November 1686 |
| Date | 08 November 1686 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 23 E.R. 619
MASTER OF THE ROLLS.
Principle approved, but distinguished, Smith v. Osborne. 1857, 6 H. L. Cas. 390. See also Taylor v. Debar, 1675, 1 Chan. Cas. 274.
Case 7.-john seabourne and thomas seabourne, Plaintiffs george powel, thomas seabotjrne Senior, alice austin the Wife of joseph austin, william mackley, and judith his Wife, Defendants. [Principle approved, but distinguished, Smith v. Ofborne. 1857, 6 H. L. Cas. 390. See also Taylor v. Debar, 1675, 1 Chan. Cas. 274.] Master of the Rolls. Nov. 8, 1686. ' A. and his wife being assignees of a lease, mortgage to B.; A. becomes insolvent, and the title not being good, C. who had the real title, in compassion to A.'s wife, makes a lease in trust for her. Decreed the trustees to make a new mortgage to B. Thomas Cowls demises houses and grounds in Chick-lane, in 1674, for a long term to build upon ; which term came by assignment to the defendant Austin and her husband, which they believed to be a good title, and borrowed 100 of the defendant Macklev's wife, upon a mortgage of it, for which the plaintiffs became bound. That the defendant Austin's husband nine years since run away for debt, and they thinking their title good, had borrowed, and built upon the ground with it, and but 15 of Kerrington's money was that way employed. Seven years after her husband's going away, the defendant [12] Austin found her title not good, the real title being in one Haynes; and he compassionating her case, for ten guineas fine, leased the premises for a long term, at four pounds j early rent, in trust for her to the defendant Powell & Al', and he had instigated Mackley to sue the plaintiff upon the bond for the mortgage-money. The plaintiff's bill was, that though the mortgage might not in strictness pf law be good, yet the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Robinson and Others v Crosse and Blackwell, Ltd
...1 I. R. 212. (10) Sel. Cas. (Ch.) 61; 2 Wh. & T. L. C., 9th ed., p. 648. (1) [1903] 2 Ch. 40, at p. 60 et seq. (2) [1905] 1 Ch. 620. (3) 2 Vern. 11. (4) 6 H. L. Cas. 375, at p. (5) 2 Ball & B. 195. (6) 2 Y. & C. Ex. 247. (7 1 C. & L. 34 (also reported in 4 Ir. Eq. R. 74 and 1 Dr. & War. 134......
-
Hughes v Howard
...A renewal of or a graft on a lease, procured honestly, is subject to all the equities of a forfeited or expired lease; Seabourne v. Powel (2 Vern. 11); Jones v. Kearney (1 Druiy & Warren, 134); Otter v. fame (6 De Gex, M. & G. 638); a renewal procured dishonestly is not less so. The bar to ......
-
Noel v Bewley
...the contingent remainder; Taylor v. Debarò(! Ca. Ch. 274; and 2 Ca. Ch. 212); Morse v. Faulkner (1 Anst. 11); Seabourne v. Powell (2 Vern. 11); that, in the first of those cases, the title under which the new estate was acquired was in direct opposition to the title to the original estate, ......
-
Thomas Kent and Aquila Kent v Sadleir Stoney and Others
...THOMAS KENT and AQUILA KENT and SADLEIR STONEY and others. Jones v. Kearney 1 Dr. & War. 159. Sibourne v. PowelENR 2 Vern. 11. Morse v. FaulknerENR 1 Anst. 11. Noel v. BewleyENR 3 Sim. 103. Smith v. Osborne 6 H. L. Cas. 390. Taylor v. Stibbert 2 Ves. Jun. 437. Steele v. MitchellUNK 3 Ir. Eq......