Routledge against Abbott, Nixon, and Hope
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 11 June 1838 |
| Date | 11 June 1838 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 112 E.R. 962
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH
[592] eoutledgb against abbott, nixon, and hope. Monday, June llth, 1838. Trespass for breaking and entering plaintiffs house and taking and converting his goods, which were described by distinct parcels. Pleas. 1. Not guilty. 2. That the house and goods were not plaintiffs. Issues thereon. 3. That the goods were not plaintiffs, but the goods of a bankrupt; justifying the seizure under a warrant of the commissioners. Replication, traversing the pleas. Issue thereon. Verdict for plaintiff as to the trespasses in entering the house, and taking parcel A. of the goods, with 1001. damages; for defendant as to parcel B. of the goods: Held, that the second and third issues were divisible, and that the verdict must be entered up distributively, according to the special finding, (a) Before Lord Denman C.J., Littledale, Patteson, and Williams Js. (d) Cited in Rex v. Johnson, 1 Mo. C. C. 175. (g) As to this, see Rex v, Jeyes, 3 A, & E. 416. 8 AD. * B. 893. ROUTLEDGE V. ABBOTT 963 for the purpose of an apportionment of costs according to Reg. Gran. Hi). 2 W. 4, I. 74. Trespass for breaking and entering plaintiff's dwelling-house, and seizing and taking his goods (many distinct parcels of which, consisting of fixtures and other articles, were described), and converting, &c. Pleas. 1. Not guilty. 2. That the dwelling-house was not plaintiff's, nor were the goods and chattels, or any of them, the goods and chattels of plaintiff, in manner and form, &c. Conclusion to the country. 3. As to seizing and taking the goods and chattels in the declaration mentioned, and as to the said converting and disposing thereof, that one Francis Knowles, being an inn-keeper, and being indebted, &c., became bankrupt: the plea then stated a fiat and proceedings in the bankruptcy, and alleged that the goods and chattels were the goods, &c. of Knowles, and that the commissioners issued their warrant, by virtue of which, and by force of the statute, &c., Nixon as messenger, Hope as his assistant and by his command, and Abbott as official assignee and as assistant to Nixon and by his command, at the times when, &c., and while the goods and chattels were Knowles's, seized and took the same for the purpose mentioned in the warrant, as they lawfully, &c. Verification. Eeplicatioii, to pleas 1 and 2, joining issue; to plea 3, that the goods and chattels were not Knowles's in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The Earl of Manchester and Others against Vale
...not be found by the jury distributively, 1 Mees. 6 W. 216, Phythian v. White. 1 Tyr. & Gr. 515. S. C. 3 Bing. N. C. 3, Knight v. Woore. 8 A. & E. 592, Eoutkdge v. Abbott. 5 Bing. N. C. 622, Higham v. Habett. 5 Mees. & W. 483, Anderson v. Chapman. The rule is further subject to this qualific......
-
Bevan against Gething
...Collins v. Forbes (3 T. R. 316), note (6) to Greene v. Jones (1 Wms. Saund. 300 b.), Freeman v. Crafts (4 M. & W. 4), Rmtledge v. Abbott (8 A. & E. 592), Alston v. Mills (9 A. & E. 248), Gordon v. The Hast India Company) (7 T. R. 228). Cur adv. vult. Lord Denman C.J., in Trinity vacation (J......
-
Traherne and Parry against Gardner and Newman
...to [173] each count. The cases will be found collected in Gray's Treatise On the Law of Costs, p. 40-64. In Routledge v. Abbott (8 A. & E. 592) the count alleged an entry of plaintiff's house and taking hia goods; a plea denied that the house and goods were plaintiff's: the jury found that ......
-
Delisser against Towne
...Reed v. Taylor, 4 Taunt. 616, but declined giving any opinion as to the doctrine of each. (c) 4 Dowl. P. C. 602. See Eoutledge v. Abbott, 8 A. & E. 592. 1 Q. B.M2. DELISSEB V. TOWNE 1163 '(5 M. & W. 483). The actiou was for negligence in stowing, and otherwise taking òcare of and conveying......