Piggott v Jefferson
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 27 February 1841 |
| Date | 27 February 1841 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 59 E.R. 1040
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
S. C. 5 Jur. 796.
Legacy. Statute of Limitations. 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27.
[26] piggott . jeffebson. Feb. 26, 27, 1841. [S. C. 5 Jur. 796.] Legacy. Statute of Limitations. 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27. An executor who had possessed assets sufficient to pay a legacy, died leaving it unpaid, and having charged his real estates with his debts. The right to sue for the legacy as such was barred by lapse of time. Held, that it could not be claimed under the charge of debts. A testatrix who died in 1808 gave a legacy of 200 to Mrs. Piggott, the daughter of General Jefferson, and appointed the general her executor and residuary legatee. Mrs. Piggott came of age in 1815. Her father possessed assets of the testatrix sufficient to pay the legacy, and died in 1824, having by his will charged his real estates with payment of his debts. Mrs. Piggott died in 1838, without having been paid her legacy. Her personal representative now claimed it, with interest from a year after the testatrix's death, as a debt due from the general and payable out of his real estates under the charge contained in his will, his personal estate being insufficient to pay it. Mr. Knight Bruce and Mr. Shadwell, for the Plaintiff. Mr. Eussell and Mr. Bacon, for the Defendant, contended that, as Mrs. Piggott was capable of giving a discharge for the legacy in 1815, when she attained 21, the Plaintiffs claim was barred by 3d & 4th Will. 4th, c. 27, sect. 40, which enacts that no action or suit or other proceeding shall be brought to recover any sum of money secured by any mortgage, judgment or lien, or otherwise charged upon or payable out of any land or rent at law or in equity, or any legacy, but within 20 years next after a present right to receive the same shall have accrued to some person capable of giving a discharge for or release of the same, unless, in the meantime, some part of the principal money or some interest thereon shall have been paid, or some acknowledgment of the right thereto shall have been given in [27] writing, signed by the person by whom the same shall be payable, or his agent, to the person entitled thereto or his agent; and in such case no such action or suit or proceeding shall be brought but within 20 years after such payment or acknowledgment, or the last of Buch payments or acknowledgments, if more...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jonathan Bullock and Others, - Appellants; Charlotte Dorothy Downes and Others, - Respondents
...(2 Coll. 290), but the construction of the statute is better considered in Paget v. Foley (2 Bing. N.C. 679), and Piggott v. Jefferson (12 Sim. 26). In PhUippo v. Munnings (2 Myl. and Cr. 309), an executor had done an act which converted him into a trustee, and so the statute was held not t......
-
Carey v Cuthbert
...v. Clay 3 Br. C. C. 639 n.; Ambl. 645. Wedderburn v. Wedderburn 4 M. & Cr. 41. Knox v. Kelly 6 Ir. Eq. R. 279. Piggott v. JeffersonENR 12 Sim. 26. Fergus v. Gore 1 Sch. & Lef. 107. Hunt v. Bateman 10 Ir. Eq. R. 360. Ravenscroft v. Frisby 1 Col. 16. Harcourt v. WhiteENR 28 Beav. 303. Legacy ......
-
Jacquet v Jacquet
...& Aid. 141); 4 Geo. 2, c. 4 (Jamaica Statute); 29 Geo. 3, c. 13 (Jamaica Statute); 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27, as. 25, 40; Piggott v. Jefferson (12 Sim. 26); Bright v. Lurcher (27 Beav. 130); Francis v. G-rmiur (5 Hare, 39); Beckford v. Wade (17 Ves. 87), were cited or referred to. the master of ......
-
Ravenscroft v Frisby
...it could, the case is within the statute: Sheppard v. Duke (9 Sim. 567), Sterndale v. Hankinson (1 Sim. 393), Piggott v. Jefferson (12 Sim. 26). There is -no acknowledgment whatever, as in Lord St. John v. Boughton (9 Sim. 219), to take it out of the statute; and the word "recover" in the 4......