Morgan v -
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1737 |
| Date | 01 January 1737 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 26 E.R. 259
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
See Ostell v. Lepage, 1851, 5 De G. & S. 105.
Case 184.-morgan v. - . Michaelmas Term, 1737. [See Ostell v. Lepage, 1851, 5 De G. & S. 105.] An original independent decree may be had in this court, where all the facts are stated by the bill, notwithstanding a former decree for the same matter in Wales. A bill was brought for a legacy in the court of equity in Brecknock in Wales, before the Welch Judges at the assize, and the legacy decreed to be paid ; the defendant appealed from the decree to the House of Lords, and insisted there was an omission in the decree ; for notwithstanding an account was directed to be taken, yet it was not ordered that all just allowances should be made in such account to the defendant : upon the appeal, the decree, as to the payment of the legacy, was affirmed, but varied as to the just allowances; and the House of Lords ordered their decree to be carried into execution by the court in Wales. [409] The defendant afterwards fled, to avoid the execution of the decree into England ; and the bill now brought, sets forth the will by which the legacy was given, and the proceedings and decree in Wales, and the appeal to the House of Lords, and their decree, and that the defendant had, to avoid the decree and payment of the money, fled into England, out of the reach of the process of the court in Wales. To this bill the defendant demurred, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Miller v Gianne
...to. (20) Mercedes Benz A.G. v. Leiduck, [1996] A.C. 284; [1995] 3 All E.R. 929; [1995] 3 L.R.C. 227, referred to. (21) Morgan”s CaseENR(1737), 1 Atk. 408; 26 E.R. 259, considered. (22) Nouvion v. FreemanELR(1889), 15 App. Cas. 1; 59 L.J. Ch. 337, followed. (23) Omni Secs. Ltd. v. Deloitte &......
-
Nathaniel Bayley, Appellant; Bryan Edwards, Respondent
...should file a supple-[710]~niental bill to enforce the execution of the first decree, according to the case from Wales, Morgan v. Halford (1 Atk. 408 ; Dougl. 0). Or if the Plaintiff omits this, the true course is, for the Defendant to insist on the prior decree by answer, not to the whole ......
-
Ostell v Le Page
...Mr. James, in reply, cited Devie v. Lord Brownlow (Dick. 611). the vice-chancellor [Sir James Parker] referred to the case of Morgan v. - (1 Atk. 408); and, after remarking that Lord Chancellor Hardwicke appeared from that case to have thought that a final decree in Wales in respect of a ma......