Lightfoot v Harron
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 July 1839 |
| Date | 01 July 1839 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 160 E.R. 835
IN THE COURT OF EXCHEQUER IN EQUITY
Applied, Cur v. Smith, 1868, L. T. 518.
3tatC.EX.6W. LIGHTFOOT V. HERON 835 The bill was filed by the creditors of Thomas Hudson, for the purpose of having a trust-deed carried into execution, by which Hudson had conveyed his estates in trust for sale and payment of his debts. A decree was made [585] by which the Master was directed to take an account of the debts, and of the tents received by the trustees; and if any special matter arose, the Master was to state the same to the Court. In consequence of this decree, Sarah Hudson, the wife of the settlor, went belore the Master to prove a debt alleged to be due to her from her husband, in respect of the arrears of an annuity, which was stated to have been settled by him to her separate use. The Master, however, disallowed her claim, and refused to report it aa a special circumstance Exceptions were therefore taken to his report. Upon the argument of the exceptions, it appeared by the wife's affidavit that Hudson had on many occasions ill-treated her, and that ultimately she was obliged to prefer an indictment against him for an assault; that the grand jury found a true bill, but that the prosecution was not proceeded with in consequence of Hudson's agreeing to settle 351. a year, the annuity in question, to her separate use ; that the settlement was prepared, but that he refused to execute it; that he was then found guilty, but that the Court gave the paities leave to compromise the matter, that Hudson accordingly agreed to execute the settlement, upon condition that the wife did not proceed to judgment against him; that, notwithstanding this .agreement, Hudson went abroad without executing the settlement. Mr. Mylne, for the exceptions, contended that the claim of the wife was founded upon an agreement made upon good consideration, and entered into with the sanction of the Court in which the indictment was tried. He cited Logan v. Bi'tkett(\ M. & K. 220) and J&nes v. Waite (5 Bing. N. C. 341), alderson, B. It is dear that the wife cannot come in as a creditor The contract was illegal; and there is this [586] further difficulty, that it was made between the husband and the wife. And with respect to the special circumstances, I think it was a, plain point, and that the Master had no occasion to report it. Exceptions overruled. LlGHTFOOT v. HERON. July 1st, 1839.-Specific performance decreed in favour of a purchaser, though no solicitor acted for the vendor; and though the contract was executed under circumstances which might easily have led to fraud , no fraud being proved in the vendor or his agent.-The fact that a party was considerably in liquor when he entered into an agreement is no reason for the Court...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bower v Cooper
...executing the agreement, and that the Plaintiff took advantage of his incapacity: Coles v. Trecothick (9 Ves. 234), LigUfoot v. Heron (3 Y. & Coll. 586), Story, Com. Equity Jurisp. p. 194, ss. 232, 233. Secondly, that the agreement was uncertain, inasmuch as it did not express what interest......