Reynell v Spyre
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 17 December 1846 |
| Date | 17 December 1846 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 50 E.R. 501
ROLLS COURT
For other proceedings, see 11 Beav. 618; 8 Hare, 222; 1 De G. M. & G. 656, 660, 712; 42 E. R. 708, 710, 730. See In re Postlethwaite, 1887, 35, Ch. D. 725.
[51] reynell v. spyre. Dec. 17, 1846. [For other proceedings, see 11 Beav. 618 ; 8 Hare, 222 ; 1 De G. M. & G. 656, 660, 712; 42 E. R. 708, 710, 730. See In re Postlethwaite, 1887, 35 Ch. D. 725.] The title of R. to an estate having been discovered by B., R. agreed to give B. a moiety of the estates for his exertions, &c., and B. was to prosecute the claim at his own risk. B., through his solicitor, afterwards took the opinion of counsel upon the case, and instituted a suit of R. v. R. in the name of R., under a power of attorney given by R. for that purpose. Held, in a suit by R. to set aside the transaction, that B. was bound to produce the opinion, and the documents in R. v. B. for R's. inspection, the same not being privileged. In the same case, B., wishing to purchase the remaining moiety, procured his solicitor to write him a letter to shew to R., and calculated to induce him to sell. R. agreed to sell. Held, in a suit to set aside the sale, that the letter was not a privileged communication. This was a motion for the production of documents. It appeared that, in 1843, the Defendant Sprye had, by some means or other, discovered that the Plaintiff Reynell was entitled in reversion to a considerable estate, under the ultimate limitation in a will of a person of the same name. In this matter, Sprye had consulted a solicitor named Young. A negotiation was entered into between the Defendant Sprye and the Plaintiff, for imparting the particulars of the discovery, which ended in an agreement between them, that Sprye should have a moiety of the estate recovered, as a remuneration for his exertions and trouble in discovering and investigating the matter; and that Sprye should undertake the risk and expense of the legal proceedings necessary to enforce the Plaintiff's rights. This arrangement was assented to on the 2d of June 1843, and on the 18th of June the opinion of counsel was taken by Young, which was favourable to the Plaintiff's claim. The arrangement was carried into effect by four instruments, dated in July 1843, and prepared by Young. The first was a power of attorney from the Plaintiff to Sprye, to commence and prosecute suits concerning the estates in the Plaintiff's name. The second was a deed [52] of indemnity from Sprye...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nestor Maritime SA v Sea Anchor Shipping Company Ltd
...difficulty in the Buyers' submission with regard to s.73 which is perhaps best exemplified by the statement of Lord Cranworth in Reynell v Spyre (1852) 1 de G.M. & G. 660 at p710: "No man can complain that another had too implicitly relied on the truth of what he has himself stated." That i......
-
Chant v Brown
...v. Eemington (2 Ves. jun. 189), Brickell v. Hulse (7 A. & E. 454), BlemMnsopp v. Blenkinsopp (2 Ph. 607; 12 Beav. 568), Beynell v. Sprye (10 Beav. 51; 11 Beav. 618), Follett v. Je/eryes (1 Sim. (N. S.) 3), Levy v. Pope (M. & M. 410), Beam v. Waters (Id. 235), Meyer v. Sefton (2 Stark. 274).......
-
Reynell v Sprye. Sprye v Reynell
...Reports Citation: 42 E.R. 710 BEFORE THE LORDS JUSTICES. Reynell and Sprye. Sprye v. Reynell S. C. 8 Hare, 222; 21 L. J. Ch. 633. Also, 10 Beav. 51; 11 Beav. 618. See Hilton v. Woods, 1867, L. R. 4 Eq. 439; Arkwright v. Newbold, 1881, 17 Ch. D. 310; Bradlaugh v. Newdegate, 1883, 11 Q. B. D.......
-
Sprye v Reynell
... ... The cross-bill was filed on the 28th of August 1846 by E. S. M. Spyre and Henrietta Digby, his wife, against Sir Thomas Eeynell and Charles Wilson, praying specific performance of the agreement contained in Sir Thomas Eeynell's letter of the 14th of May 1844. Sir Thomas Eeynell died pending the suit, and the proceedings were afterwards revived by and against his ... ...