Lampon the Younger against Corke
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 27 April 1822 |
| Date | 27 April 1822 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 106 E.R. 1312
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
1312 LAMPON V. CORKE 5 B. &ALD.606. [606] lampon the younger against cokke. Saturday, April 27th, 1822. A deed containing a general release of all debts, &c., recited that the releasee had previously agreed to pay to the releasor the sum of 401. for the possession of certain premises, and that in " consideration of the said sum of. 401. being now so paid as hereinbefore is mentioned," and also in consideration of the sum of 10s. a piece, well and truly paid to the said releasor and J. S., the receipt of which said several sums of money they did thereby acknowledge, did release, &c. There was also a receipt for the sum of 401. indorsed on the release. But it appeared on action afterwards brought for this sum that, in fact, it had never been paid : Held, that this deed of release was no estoppel, inasmuch as the general words of release were qualified by the recital, which stated only an agreement to pay, and not an actual payment of the sum of 401. Assumpsit against the defendant, as the maker of the following promissory note, dated Edenbridge, April llth, 1821, "Two months after date I promise to pay Mr. Thomas Lampon, Junior, or order, the sum of 401., value received this day, in things appraised by Mr. Doubell, and in having possession given to me of the premises lately held under me by Thomas Lampon, Senior, afterwards by the sheriff." The declaration contained, also, counts for goods sold and delivered, and the usual money counts. Plea, general issue. At the trial, at the last London sittings, before Abbott C.J., it appeared, that the defendant was the landlord of certain premises occupied by the plaintiff's father, and that the plaintiff having taken possession of the premises, and the crops growing thereon, under a writ of execution against [607] his father, the defendant, in order to get possession of the premises and crops, gave the note in question, which, when originally signed by him, did not contain the words " or order." These words were inserted on the 14th April, 1821, without his knowledge. Under these circumstances, the Lord Chief Justice thought the count on the note could not be sustained, and the plaintiff then proceeded on the other counts in the declaration. The defendant, in answer to the plaintiff's case, put in a deed, executed by the plaintiff, dated 14th April, 1821, which recited that Thomas Lampou the Elder, was in possession of certain hereditaments and premises, as tenant to the defendant, but which tenancy would have expired on the 29th day of September, 1821, had it not been otherwise determined ; and that the plaintiff had recovered a judgment against...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Veale v Warner
...in a deed shew that the money has not been paid, it is held that the words of the release and receipt are restrained in their operation. 5 B. & A. 606, Lamport v. Corke. 1 D. & R. 211, S. C. [2 Y & J. 407, Bottrell v. Summers.] In 1 Camp. 392, A liter v. George, which was an action brought ......
-
Wardman v Macquarie Bank Limited
... ... which is a recoverable allocation against any commission earned ... Commission payments will be ... first ... 423 [105 ER 890]. As it is concisely expressed by Best J in ... Lampon v Corke (1822) 5 B & Ald 606 at ... 611 [106 ER 1312 at 1314] “If ... ...
-
Billing v Welch
...46; S. C. 4 Brown, P. C. 73. Waugh v. BussellUNKENR 1 Marsh, 214; S. C. 5 Taunt. 707. Hall v. Betty 4 M. & Gr. 410. Lampon v. CorkeENR 5 B. & A. 606. Eastern Counties Railway v. Marriage 9 H. L. 32, 44, 62, 64. De Vesci v. O'KellyUNKUNKIRIR I. R. 2 C. L. 267; S. C. I. R. 4 C. L. 269. Creagh......
-
Potts and Wife v Nixon
...(1) 12 Ir. L. R. 5. (6) 5 Ex. 959. (2) Ib. 749. (7) 2 Taunt. 141. (3) 4 Bing. N. C. 797. (8) 1 B. & C. 704. (4) 2 A. & E. 295, n. (9) 5 B. & Ald. 606. (5) 5 H. & R. 528. (10) L. R. 5 Ch. App. 6.'" 5. Vol.. V.] COMMON LAW SERIES. 47 FITZGERALD, B., delivered the judgment of the Court. Excheq......