Randall v Rigby
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | Exchequer |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1838 |
| Date | 01 January 1838 |
English Reports Citation: 150 E.R. 1372
EXCH. OF PLEAS.
S. C. 6 Dowl. P. C. 650; 1 H. & H. 231; 7 L. J. Ex. 240.
liANDALL v. eigby. Exch. of Pleas. 1838.-Lands were enfeoffed to R. H. and the j^,defendant, to the use, intent, and purpose that the plaintiff, his heirs and assigns ;. for ever, should receive and take out of the lands a yearly rent of (!3l. payable half yearly : and the defendant covenanted with the plaintiff that ti. [I. and the defendant, their executors, &c., or some or one of them, would pay or cause to be paid to the plaintiff, his heirs and assigns, the said yearly rent at the terms appointed for1 payment thereof:-Held, that the plaintiff could not sue the defendant in debt for arrears of the annuity. [S. C. 6 Dowl. P. C. G50; 1 H. & H. 231; 7 L. J. Ex. 240.] : The declaration stated that heretofore, to wit, on the 17th of October1, 1837, in and by a certain indenture then made between the plaintiff of the first part, William Brookes of the second part, and Richard Ilollins and the defendant of the third part, the counterpart of which, &c., certain land and premises were granted, bargained, sold, aliened, enfeoffed, and confirmed unto the said Richard Hollins and the defendant, their heirs and assigns, to hold the same unto the said Richard Hollins and the 4M.&W.131. RANDALL V. RIGBY 1-373 defendant, and their heirs, to the use, intent, and purpose that the plaintiff, his heirs and assigns for ever, should and might, out of the said land and dwelling-houses, and other buildings erected thereupon, with the appurtenances, receive and take one clear yearly rent or sum of 631. of lawful money of Great Britain, to be payable half-yearly, free from all deductions whatsoever; and to the further uses, intents, and purposes in the said indenture mentioned: and the said defendant did by the said indenture, for himself and his heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, covenant, promise, and:agree with and to the plaintiff, his heirs and assigns, that they the said Richard Hollins aud the defendant, their heirs, executors, administrators, and [131] assigns, or some or one of them, should or would for ever thereafter well and truly pay or cause to he paid unto the plaintiff', his heirs and assigns, the said yearly rent of 631. by the said indenture limited in use to him or them, on the days and times thereinbefore appointed for payment thereof, and hereinbefore mentioned, without any deduction or abatement whatsoever...
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
-
Gaw v Córas Iompair Éireann
...503. (2) Mau. & Sel. 53. (3) 3 B. & A. 392. (4) Moor (K. B.) 179. (5) 7 E. & B. 816. (1) 5 Mau. & Sel. 411. (2) 8 Q. B. D. 403, at (1) 4 M. & W. 130. (2) 5 Mau. & Sel. (3) 8 Q. B. D. 403. (4) Sm. L. C. (13th ed., 1929), vol. 1, at p. 89. (1) 4 M. & W. 130. (2) 5 Mau. & Sel. 411. (3) 8 Q. B.......
-
Sunderland Marine Insurance Company v Kearney
...the action of debt does not lie, because the demand is not liquidated, and is also collateral. It is like that in Randall v. Rigby (4 M. & W. 130), where, land having been conveyed to H. and defendant subject to the animal payment of a rent to E., defendant covenanted that he and H., or one......
-
Evans v Jones and Another
...in the case of the assignment of a lease, alluded to in Randall v. Rigby. Here the defendants 5M. &W. Z98. BARTON V. BROWNRandall v. Rigby (4 M. & W. 130)i This is a stronger case than that, because here the principal does not join in the covenant. J. Henderson. This case is altogether ......
-
Harrison v Matthews
...1'23:-"So, perhaps, if the covenant be in the disjunctive, as to do such an act, or to pay 10, debt will not lie, though the actEandall v. liitjly (4 M. & W. 130), where lands were enfeoft'ed to Kieharcl Hollins and the defendant, to the use, intent, and purpose that the plaintiff, his heir......