Lewis v Ashton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1836 |
| Date | 01 January 1836 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 150 E.R. 529
EXCH. OF PLEAS.
S. C. 1 Tyr. & G. 767; 2 Gale, 80.
lewis v. ashton. Exch. of Pleas. 1836.-The plaintiff' arrested the defendant for 421. 5s. money lent, and proved on the trial admissions of the loan of 181., for which amount she had a verdict. On a motion to allow the defendant his costs under the statute 43 Geo. 3, c. 4G, s. 3, it appeared from the plaintiffs affidavit, that she had lent the defendant sums of money at different times, amounting to the sum for which he was arrested, but it did not appear that she had any witness to or evidence of such loans, beyond the defendant's admissions as proved on the trial. The defendant swore that she had lent him only 11. The Court, although believing from the affidavits that the whole sum was due, and that the defendant's affidavit was false, held, that as the plaintiff could have had no reasonable ground to expect that she could recover the whole debt for which she made the arrest, the defendant was entitled to his costs under the statute. [S. C. 1 Tyr. & G. 767 ; 2 Gale, 80.] This was an action of assumpsit for money lent. The defendant was arrested and held to bail for 421. 5s. At the trial before Coleridge, J., at the last Carmarthen Assizes, the plaintiff proved an admission by the defendant to the constable who arrested him, that the plaintiff had at different times lent him money amounting to nearly 201.; and the jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, damages 181. [494] On a former day in this term, John Evans obtained a rule nisi to allow the defendant his costs under the statute 43 Geo. 3, o. 4f , s. 3, on an affidavit of the defendant, which stated that the plaintiff never lent him any money except the sum of 11., and that he never had made the admission sworn to. In opposition to the rule was sworn tie affidavit of the plaintiff, which set forth the several occasions on which she stated that she had lent the defendant different sums of money, amounting to the whole sum for which he was arrested, the savings of her service in the family of the Bishop of St. David's ; that an intimacy had been formed between her atid defendant, and that, in the confidence that he intended to marry her, she had been induced to let him have money at different times, for which...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gilbert v Corsier
...of the existence or absence of reasonable or probable cause: and he referred to Tipton v. Gardner, 5 N. & M. 424, and Lewis v. Ashton, 1 M. & W. 493. [634] D. D. Keane now shewed cause, upon affidavits stating that the work and materials in respect of which the plaintiff had brought his act......
-
Joel v Peard
...Bench. JOEL and PEARD. Donlan v. BrettENR 10 B. & C. 117. Day v. Picton Ibid, 120. Russell v. Atkinson 2 N. & M. 667. Lewis v. AshtonENR 1 M. & W. 493. Robinson v. Whitehead 6 D. P. C. 292; S. C. 1 N. & P. 219. Ballantine v. Taylor 1 Nev. & P. 221. Summers v. Grosvenor 2 D. P. C. 224. Wilso......