Lord v Wormleighton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 27 July 1822 |
| Date | 27 July 1822 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 37 E.R. 806
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
S. C. Jac. 580. See Lee v. Park, 1836, 1 Keen, 721; Vincent v. Godson, 1850, 3 De G. & Sm. 726.
lord v. wormleighton. Dec. 8, 9, 1820; May 31, 1821. [S. G. Jac. 580. See Lee v. Park, 183G, 1 Keen, 721 ; Vincent v. Godson, 1850, 3 De G. & Sm. 72G.] To an action by a creditor, the executor pleaded non assumpsit, a set off, and plen? adininistravit prceter, and the verdict was against him on all these pleas. A decree for administration of the estate having been pronounced pending the; action, an injunction was granted against the creditor on payment of his costs at law. This was a creditor's suit, in which the usual decree had been pronounced. A motion was made on the part of the defendant the executor, that W. Jones, a creditor, might be restrained from further proceeding at law : the circumstances were us follows :- Soon after the testator's death, in May 1819, Jones delivered to the executor a bill amounting to £321, 8s. Qd. for medical attendance. In May 1820 he commenced an action for the recovery of it; the declaration was delivered on the 10th of June. The defendant pleaded the general issue, non assumpsit ; a set-off, and plene administravit pra.'ter £10 ; the latter plea was afterwards amended by extending the admission of assets to £200. On the 15th of July, notice of trial was given for the Leicester assizes to be held the 2Gth of that month. It appeared that the bill in this cause was filed on the 12th of July, the answer and replication on the 17th, and the decree obtained on the 21st of the same month. On that day, notice of the decree was sent to Jones's [149] solicitor. The trial took place a few days after. Upon the first and second issues, the jury found for the plaintiff Jones, and, upon the third, they found assets in the hands of the executor to the amount of £321, 19s. jilt/. ; they found damages £200, and forty shillings costs. The motion was originally made before his Honour the Vice-Chancellor, who ordered, that upon the defendant paying to Jones his costs incurred up to the time of his having notice of the decree, lie should be enjoined from proceeding at law : and he declared that Jones's debt should be taken, according to the verdict obtained by him, at £200. A motion was now made on the part of Jones to discharge this order. Mr. Hart and Mr. Seames in support of the motion. The rule established by the case of Terrewest v. Featherby ('2...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Hawkins v Clayton
-
Vincent v Godson
...advanced for the first time by the creditor in the case. They also referred to Terrewest v. Featherby (2 Mer. 480), Lard, v. Wortnldghtom (Jac. 148), Kirby v. Barton (8 Beav. 45), Perry v. PMips (10 Ves. 34), Vernon v. Thellusson (1 Ph. 466), Rouse v. Jones (1 Ph. 462), Paxtonv. Douglas (8 ......
-
William Bookless, on behalf of Himself and other Creditors of Henry Bookless, Deceased, v William Crummack
...v. Thacker, 3 Swanston, 529, and those upon which Sir John Leach granted and Lord Eldon sustained the injunction in Lord v. Wormleiyhton, Jacob, 148. (3) See Paxton v. Dougkis, 8 Vesey, 520 ; Gilpin v. Lady Southampton, 18 Vesey, 469 ; Drewry v. Thacker, 3 Swanston, 529, 546 ; Clarke v. Lor......
-
Lee v Park
...et si non, for the costs only, de bonis propriis, the Court would restrain the creditor from proceeding at law ; Lord v. Wormleigkton (Jac. 148); and that is the form of the judgment against an executor, where it is suffered to go by default. Hancocke v. Prowd (1 Saund. 336, Serj. Williams'......
-
An historical analysis of the binding effect of class suits.
...estate and on the grounds that no executor would be safe if he were liable to answer in a case such as this). (82) See Lord v. Wormleighton, Jac. 148, 149-50, 37 Eng. Rep. 806, 806-07 (Ch. 1821) (granting an executor's motion for an injunction against a creditor such that the creditor was r......