Prigg v Adams
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1741 |
| Date | 01 January 1741 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 90 E.R. 762
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
phigg versus adams. 2 Salk. 674. Where a judgment is not ipso facto void, tho' declared by a private Act of Parliament, that it shall be void. Skin. 350, 366, 407, S. C. Vide 2 Lev. 184, & 243. 3 Lev. 23. In an action of false imprisonment, the defendant pleaded a judgment in the Town-Court of Bristol, obtained against Prigg, and that he was arrested and imprisoned by virtue of an execution thereon, &c. The plaintiff replied, arid set forth a private Act of Parliament lately made, by which a Court of Conscience was erected in that city, to have the sole conusance in the several actions therein expressed, concerning all matters under 40s. to be brought against any poor inhabitant of that city, and that all judgments elsewhere for such matters should be meerly void. * 1 Inst. 22 b. Moor 284. 1 Leon. 182. 2 Cro. 321. Moor, Case 237. Co. Litt. 22 b. Dyer 54 b. CARTHEW, 275. TERM. PASCH. 5 W. AND M. B. R. 763 Then he seta forth, that he is a poor inhabitant of the said city, and that the matter for which the judgment was obtained was under 40s. and that the action was within the said statute. There was a frivolous rejoinder to this replication, and thereupon a demurrer; and the questions were, (1.) Whether this judgment against Prigg was by force of this Act of Parliament ipso facto void, or whether it is voidable by writ of error, or by plea. (2.) Whether Prigg hath now lost the benefit of the said Act by not pleading it in the original action to the jurisdiction of the Court, and setting forth, that he was a poor inhabitant of that city, so as to intitle him to the benefit of that Act. [275] (3.) What remedy, if any now remained to Prigg, (after judgment) to avoid the same. Aud after argument it was resolved by the Court, That thia judgment was not ipso facto void, ao as to make the plaintiff in the original action, and the officers (who...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Coppinger v Bradley
...Cameron v. LightfootUNK 2 Wm. Bl. 1190 Barker v. Braham 3 wils. 368. Philips v. BironENR 1 Str. 508. Brig v. AdamsENRENR Comb. 235; S.C. Carth. 274. Perkin v. Procter 2 Wils. 382. Parsons v. Lloyd 3 Wils. 341. Britton v. ColeENR 12 Mod. 175. CodringtonENR 8 Ad. & El. 449. Dicas v. Lord Brou......
-
Barker Widow v Braham and Norwood. C. B
...it is as if it had never been ; and not like a judgment reversed by error, so is 1 Lev. 95, Turner versus Felgate. T. Eaym. 73, S. C. Carth. 274. Salk. 674. 12 Mod. 178. 2 Wilson, 385. 1 Stra. 509. T. Jones, 215. -A sheriff, or his officers, or any acting under his or their authority, may j......