Panton, Widow, v Jones
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 08 April 1813 |
| Date | 08 April 1813 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 170 E.R. 1415
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS
Panton
Widow
and
Jones
Thursday, April 8, 1813. panton, widow, v. jones. (If the occupier of a house submits to a distress for rent stated in the notice of distress to be due from him as tenant to the distramer, this is an acknowledgment of the tenancy ) This was an action for the use and occupation of a house at Bristol. The defendant had never paid rent personally to the plaintiff, and she did not give strict...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
5 cases
- Chee Seng & Company Sdn Bhd; Seng Huat Hang Sdn Bhd and Others
-
Crawford v Gillmor
...Kennedy v. Phelan Ibid. 320 n. Rankin v. Mc MurtryUNK 24 L. R. Ir. 290. Doe d. Rutledge v. JenningsUNK 3 Ir. L. R. 268. Panton v. JonesENR 3 Camp. 372. Keene v. M'BlaineUNK 17 Ir. C. L. R. 654. Billing v. ArnoldUNK Ir. R. 7 C. L. 529. Campion v. CampionUNK Ir. R. 8 C. L. 313. Barnes v. Barn......
-
Martin Mills (Defendant), Appellant; George J. Hoey (Complainant), Respondent
...the matter further. Kenny, J., concurred. J. M. (1) Before Gibson and Kenny, JJ. (1) 5 T. R. 4. (2) 2 Wils. 208. (3) 11 Ad. & E. 335. (4) 3 Camp. 372. (1) [1904] 2 I. R. (2) [1913] 2 I. R. 113. (1) [1913] 2 I. R. 113. ...
-
Trent v Hunt
...the distress, he would have been estopped from afterwards disputing the mortgagor's claim: Cooper v. Blandy (1 Bing. N. C. 45), Panton v. Jones (3 Camp. 372) Secondly. A mortgagor in possession has no implied authority to distrain in the name of the mortgagee. The case of a receiver in Chan......
Get Started for Free