Lechmers and Thorowgood
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1724 |
| Date | 01 January 1724 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 90 E.R. 381
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
Disapproved, Giles v. Grover, 1832, 6 Bli. N. S. 302.
[123] lechmere and thorowgood. [Disapproved, Giles v. Grover, 1832, 6 Bli. N. S. 302.] 1 Show. 12. 3 Mod. 236. After judgment executed, the goods, &c. are in custodia legis, and not liable to Exchequer-process, or commission of bankrupts. Trespass by the assignees of the commissioners of bankruptcy against the Sheriffs of London, and others, for taking his goods: it was found by special verdict, that one Toplady was a vintner, and a judgment had against him, and a jfieri facias awarded, tested 27th of April, and afterwards, viz. the 28th of April, he became a bankrupt; the 29th of April the sheriff took the goods by vertue of the fieri facias; afterwards an extent issued out of the Exchequer, whereby the goods are taken out of the sheriffs hands: afterwards the commissioners of bankruptcy make an assignment to the creditors, and the assignee brings trespass against the officers, who took the goods by vertue of the extent: and whether the defendants be guilty, or not, is the question 1 Pollexfen for the plaintiff. That the fieri facias being after the bankruptcy comes too late by the statute 21 Jac. c. 10. Vide Perry and Sawyer's case, that an inrollment is good ab initio. Baily and Bunning's case, Sid. 271, that an action lies against the sheriff on an execution after the bankruptcy. Thompson contra. That this is not for the King's debt, but a process in aid ; that such extent in aid shall not take the goods taken in execution by the fieri facias. Vide Baily and Bunning's case. And Shower said, that the extent came time enough before the assignment; and so is the practice of the Exchequer. versus Lewis in the Exchequer 20 Car. 2. Vide Sish and Bunion's case there accordingly. Holt C. J. The property of the goods is vested by the delivery of the fieri facias, 382 TERMING SANCTVE TBINITATIS COMBERBACH, 124. and tbe extent afterwards for the King comes too late, and that on the Statute of Frauds and Perjuries. Afterwards in this term, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Garland v Carlisle
...goods lawfully, trespassers, and so is the case of Bayley v. Hunning. This case of Lechmere v. Thorogood is reported in two other books, in Comb. 123; the latter part of the case is agreeable to this of Shower, that a construction should not be made to make the officer a trespasser by relat......
-
Wilbraham v Snow
...as such, but is a covenant ouly, for a breach of which the obligor may bring his action. Garth. 63, Ayloffe v. Scrimpshire. 1 Show. 46. Comb. 123, 124. 2 Salk. 473, S. G.(e) But where a bond (a) S. P. 1 B. Moore, 358, Thomson v. Brown. 5 B. & A. 187, Daveyv. Prendergrass. 8 Price, 467, Bult......
-
George Garland, Esq., - Plaintiff in Error; Thomas Carlisle, Assignee of the Estate and Effects of George Valentine Leonard, a Bankrupt, - Defendant in Error
...to discover what the Court ultimately did decide, or upon what ground they decided. Letch-more v. Thoroiaffood (3 Mod. 236.; 1 Show. 12.; Comb. 123) and Letchmore v. Toplady (1 Show. 146.; 2 Vent. 169) decided only, first, that trespass would not lie, and secondly, that the judgment in an a......
-
Balme and Others, Assignees of Bankhart and Benson, Bankrupts, v Hutton, Jewison, Ingham, Wood, and Others
...are not additional authorities, because this very.point was not adjudged in either. Of Letchmere v. Thorogood (3 Mod. 236. 1 Show. 12. Comb. 123), it is sufficient to say that the form of action there was trespass, and not trover, and the only point decided was, that a man shall not be made......