Philips v Robinson
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 07 May 1827 |
| Date | 07 May 1827 |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
English Reports Citation: 130 E.R. 708
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, AND OTHER COURTS
S. C. 12 Moore, 308; 5 L. J. C. P. (O. S.) 111. Referred to, Corbett v. National Provident Institution, 1900, 17 T. L. R. 5.
708 PHILIPS V. ROBINSON 4 BIHG, 1M. [106] philips v. robinson. May 7, 1827. [S. C. 12 Moore, 308; 5 L. J. C. P. (O. S.) 111. Referred to, Cmlett v. Natimal Provident Institution, 1900, 17 T. L. R. 5.] Plaintiff delivered to Defendant the title-deeds of Plaintiff's wife's estate. Plaintiff having afterwards levied a fine of the property to the use of his son: Held, that Plaintiff could not support trover for the deeds. Detinue for deeds. The declaration alleged that the Plaintiff delivered, and caused to be delivered, to the Defendant certain deeds (describing them) of the said Plaintiff, of great value, to wit, of the value of 10001., to be re-delivered by the Defendant to the Plaintiff when the Defendant should be thereunto afterwards requested ; yet the Defendant, although requested, refused to redeliver them, and unjustly detained them. Second count, that the Plaintiff was lawfully possessed, as of his own property, of certain other deeds (describing them), and being so possessed, lost them, and they came to the Defendant's possession by finding. Yet the Defendant, knowing them to be the property of the Plaintiff, had not delivered them to Plaintiff, though requested, but detained them. Pleas: 1st, non detinet; 2dly, that the Plaintiff did not deliver the deeds to the Defendant; 3dly, that the Plaintiff was not lawfully possessed of the deeds, as of his own property; 4thly, that they were not the property of the Plaintiff; Stbly, that Defendant, as a conveyancer, bad a lien on them. At the trial before Gaselee J., Middlesex sittings after last Michaelmas term, it appeared that the Defendant was entered as a student at one of the Inns of Court, and had taken out a certificate as a conveyancer ; that the deeds in question were the title deeds of an estate belonging to the Plaintiffs wife; that the Plaintiff or his agent, after his marriage, had delivered them to the Defendant, with instructions to prepare a conveyance of the property ; that the Defendant prepared the convey-[107]-ance accordingly; that an attorney was employed by him to levy a fine of the property, to which the Plaintiff and his wife were parties ; and that a fine was levied accordingly ; the uses of which were declared to such person as Plaintiff's wife should appoint, and for default of appointment, to George...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harriot Davies against George Croft Vernon and Luke Minshall
...4 Man, & G-. 972, was cited for the defendants. (i)1 On this part of the case Owen v. Knight, 4 New Ca. 54, and Philips v. Robinson, 4 Bing. 106, were cited in support of the rule. (6)" 3 B. & Ad. 354. See Bamfard v. Shuttkivorth, 11 A. & E. 926. (c) -2 Mod. 242. Lane v. Cotton, 12 Mod. 472......
-
Pelly v Wathen
...to Allen v. Knight (5 Hare, 272), Mangles v. Dixon (1 Mac. & G. 437), Hooper v. Ramsbottom (6 Taunt. 12), and Philips v. Robinson (4 Bing. 106). Mr. Bazalgette, in reply. Nov. 26. the lord justece lord cranworth on this clay delivered the judgment of the Court, and after stating the facts, ......
-
Hudson v Slade and Others
...or for whose interest the contents were written. Thus it is that title deeds belong to the owner of the estate ; Phillips v. Robinson, 4 Bing. 106 ; but on a contract going off, the deeds cancelled are the purchaser's ; Esdaile v. Oxenham, 3 B. & C. 225 ; see also Hall v. Ball, 3 Sc. N. R 5......
-
Caterers Ltd v Bell and Anders
...the debt as part of the fruits. Kent, in reply: The person entitled to the land has the dominium in the title deeds. Philips v Robinson (4 Bing. 106); Harrington v Price and Another (3 B and Ad. Cur adv vult. Postea (November 24). Judgment Innes, C, J.: The relief prayed in the declaration ......