Reeves v Baker
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 25 March 1851 |
| Date | 25 March 1851 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 51 E.R. 168
ROLLS COURT
[436] reeves v. baker. March 8, 1851. Matter ought not, at the commencement of a suit, to be treated as impertinent, which may, at the hearing, be found relevant. A trustee called on the Defendant to set forth whether, for the reasons in the bill atated, or some other and what reasons, he was unable to execute the trusts, " or how otherwise." The Defendant, in his answer, imputed to the Plaintiffs solicitor needless delay in effecting a proposed compromise, his inducement being to favour another solicitor, his personal friend. Held, that the statement was not scandalous. John Reeves devised his property to his widow, Mary Reeves, coupled, however, with a precatory trust in favour of " their united relatives." Mary Reeves disposed of the property by her will amongst relatives j and of this will, Henry and John Reeves were trustees, and Betsy Baker executrix. Henry Reeves filed this bill for the administration of the two estates, and thereby stated that Robert Baker, the heir at law of Mary Reeves, the widow, had filed a bill in 1848, contesting the validity of her will, which he had, in 1849, abandoned. That in consequence of the conflicting claims, the Plaintiff and his co-trustee were unable to carry into execution the trusts of the two wills, except under this Court. The interrogatories asked whether some and what questions and difficulties had not arisen, &c., &c., &c.; "whether for the reasons aforesaid, or for some other and what reasons, the Plaintiff and his co-trustee were not unable to carry into execution the trusts of the will," &c., "or how otherwise." Betsy Baker, by her answer, as to the suit of the heir, said, first, she believed that Messrs. Edwards & Godwin (who were the solicitors of the trustees), or some clerk in their office by their direction, had some communication with Robert Baker, who was put forward by them, and advised to dispute the validity [437] of the will of Mary Reeves; and for such purpose Messrs. Edwards & Godwin furnished Robert Baker with copies of the wills of John Reeves and Mary Reeves, and allowed him and his professional advisers to have access to the papers laid before counsel by the trustees, and supplied him with requisite information to enable him to file a bill to dispute the will of Mary Reeves, on the ground of her mental incapacity to make the same, and otherwise to dispute the said wills and codicils. And she said she believed...
To continue reading
Request your trial