Michell against Waldron
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Year | 1794 |
| Date | 1794 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 87 E.R. 1045
COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, CHANCERY, COMMON PLEAS, EXCHEQUER.
case 397. michel!, against waldron. A misprision of the clerk in a writ of inquiry in Common Pleas, may be amended in the King's Bench, and the Court will order the roll to be brought in.-Ante, 270, 272. Writ of error of a judgment in the Court of Common Pleas. The error assigned was, that the award of the wiit of inquiry was, " Idea ymceptum est vie' London, quod inquirat," in the singular number, and so all along in the singular number. The question was, whether this be amendable in this Court, so as to save the defendant the costs which he must pay upon an amendment in the Common Pleas? And the eases of Lewsan v. Redleston (a) and Wolley v. Moseley (b) were quoted for such amendments here; the case in Ventris (c) was allowed by the Court. But the Court seemed to incline that they could not amend, this being the award of the Court; but would consider. And in Hilary term the Court said, it was only a mistake of the clerk; for the Courts of Westminster do take notice that there are two sheriffs in London. But because the Court cannot amend without having something to amend by, Holt, of the Court to be against him, offered the plaintiff his half-crmvn and costs, which was accepted of, and so no judgment was given in the case. S. C. 2 Ld. Hay. 1166.-In assumpsit to pay for a horse a barley-corn a nail, doubling every nail, it was averred in the declaration that there were thirty-two nails in every shoe, which, doubling every nail, came to 500 quarters of barley ; and Hyde, Chief Justice, directed the jury to give the value of the horse in damages, and they gave eight pounds; and held good, James v. Morgan, 1 Lev. Ill, for a catching bargain shall not be taken advantage of, Lord Chesterfield v. Jansen, 1 Wils. 295, and giving him the value of the horse was giving him all that he was in reason and justice intitled to ; and to that he was intitled, as the defendant had no right to have the horse for nothing. 2 Bac. Ab. 4, notis. (a) Cro. Eliz. 677, 709. (b) Cro. Eliz. 760. (c) 2 Vent. 171. See also Walker v. Fdches, Cro. Eliz. 162, and Em v. Gwynn, Hob. 90. 1046 MICHAELMAS TERM, 3 QUEEN ANNE. IN B. R. 6 MOD. 307. Chief Justice, ordered the officer of the Court of Common Pleas to attend with the roll in order to make the amendment.
English Reports Citation: 87 E.R. 1046
COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, CHANCERY, COMMON PLEAS...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Knight v FP Special Assets Ltd
-
Mr. Farington's Case
...tax for the building of ships, for their salaries. 3 Nels. Abr. 277, pi. 1. See 2 Salk. 615, 616. 1 Salk. 156, 169, 198, 221. 5 Mod. 368. 6 Mod. 306. On a reference by the King to all the Judges and Barons. They met together this term in the dining-hall of Serjeants Inn in Fleetstreet. And ......
-
The Case of Sir Miles Hobert and William Stroud, Esq
...288. 363. 18 Edw. 4. pi. . 8 Hen. 7. pi. 71. 1 Co. 45. 7 Co. 25. a. 8 Co. 133. b. 3 Lev. 234. Cro. Eliz. 737. Cro. Jac. 420. Lut. 1667. 6 Mod. 306. Salk. 463. Co. Lit. 303. b. 5 Com. Dig. 59. 244. Error to reverse a judgment in the Common Pleas in debt. The plaintiff declared, that the defe......