Milnes v Cowley and Others
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 14 May 1817 |
| Date | 14 May 1817 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 146 E.R. 408
IN THE COURT OF EXCHEQUER
milxes v. CoWLEY AND others. 14th May 1817.-The Statute of Limitations cannot be pleaded by trustees, in answer to a charge of breach of trust, to defend them from the consequences of neglecting their duty in having sold an estate charged with the payment of a sum of money, without satisfying that demand. The Bill stated,-that in consideration of an intended marriage between the plaintiff and Margaret Marples, the daughter of John Marples, deceased, the following agreement was entered into between .Robert Milnes, the father of the plaintiff, and the said John Marples, dated 12th November 1778; -'That Robert Milnes would for himself, before or upon John Millies' day of marriage with Margaret Marples, give in lands, goods, money, or securities, the sum of 5001. unto Johu Milnes his son. And that John Marplea would, before or upon Margaret Marples' day of marriage with John Milnes, give in lands, goods, money, or securities, the sum of 2501. unto Margaret Marples. And .Robert Milnes further agrees, that he and his wife will resign up all the house and lands they now rent, unto John Milnes ; and if they cannot agree to live together, the said Robert Milnes will take another place, or live separate in the said house." That the marriage [104] took place shortly after the agreement, and Robert Milnes, the plaintiff's father, performed his part of the agreement; but John Marples never performed his part. That Margaret Milnes, the wife of the plaintiff, was dead; and that John Marples also died the 9th December 1808, having by his will devised his real estate to Leonard Cowley and John Foulds, two of the defendants, upon certain trusts; and the residue of his estate and effects he directed to be divided among his children (who were also defendants) in the manner stated in the will. That Cowley and Foulds administered to his will, and became his personal representatives, and as such possessed his personal estate, and entered as his devisees into possession of his real estates. That some difficulty arose with respect to the mode of payment of the said 2501., and as to the dower of tho testator's widow; and in consequence thereof a meeting of all the parties, interested under the will, took place on the 19th March 1810, when an agreement was entered into for the purpose of authorizing the trustees to sell and convey certain parts of the said testator's real...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brereton v Hutchinson
...& Cr. 122. Spackman v. TimbrellENR 8 Sim. 253. Richardson v. HortonENR 7 Beav. 112. Ex parte Bolton 1 Deac. & Ch. 556. Milnes v. CowleyENR 4 Price, 103. Baker v. MartinENR 5 Sim. 380. Dickenson v. Lord HollandENR 2 Beav. 310. March v. Russell 3 M. & Cr. 31. Cummins v. CumminsENR 3 Jones & L......
-
Hunt v Bateman
...390. Townshend v. Townshend 1 Bro. C. C> 551 Beckford v. Wade 17 Ves. 87. Cholmndeley v. Clinton 2 Jack. & Walk. 175. Milnes v. LawleyENR 4 Price, 103. Jones v. ScottENR 1 Russ. & My. 255; S. C. 4 Cl. & F. 391. Shipard v. Lutwidge 8 Ves. 26. Salter v. Cavanagh 1 Dru. & War. 668. Shaw v. Bor......