Sampson against Brown and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 25 June 1802 |
| Date | 25 June 1802 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 102 E.R. 436
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
[439] sampson against brown and another. Friday, June 25th, 1802. A writ of error allowed, though not returned, is in itself a supersedeas; and may be pleaded by the bail to have been issued and allowed after the issuing and before the return of the ca. sa. against the principal, so as to avoid proceedings against them in scire. facias upon the recognizance of bail, prosecuted after a return by the sheriff of non est inventus made pending such writ of error. The plaintiff declared as of Hil. 42 Geo. 3, in scire facias against the defendants as bail of one John Mac Guire, and stated the first writ against the principal to be tested the 25th June, 41 Geo. 3, returnable on Friday next after the morrow of All Souls, to which nihil was returned; and then stated a .second writ returnable on Thursday on the morrow of St. Martin; to which another nihil was returned: and òthereupon the plaintiff prayed execution to be adjudged to him of the debt and damages, according to the form of the recognizance of bail. Plea, that after the judgment against Mac Guire a writ of capias ad satis-faciendum issued against him directed to the sheriff, returnable on Wednesday next after 15 days of the Holy Trinity, and that before the same was returnable or returned, viz. on 15th June 1801, a writ of error was duly issued out of Chancery directed to Lord Kenyon the then Lord Chief Justice of B. E., commanding him that the record and proceedings of the s'aid suit and judgment (against the principal) should be brought before the justices of C. B. and Barons of the Exchequer in the Exchequer-Chamber on Tuesday the 23d June 1801, according to the form of the statute, &c. as by the said writ of error now remaining with the proper officer of B. E. in that behalf not yet returned by the said Chief Justice more fully appears; which said writ of error afterwards and before the said writ or any writ of capias ad satisfaciendum on the said judgment against-Mac Guire was returned or returnable, viz. on 16th-June 1801, was duly allowed, &e. according to the course [440] and practice of the (a) Grose J. was absent from indisposition. . 2 EAST, 441. SAMPSON V. BROWN 437 said Court. The plea then averred that the saM writ of ca. sa. so issued against Mac Guire, viz., on the 19th of June 1801, was returned by the sheriff pending the said writ of "error, and whilst the same was in full force and effect, and during the time that the said writ of error was a supersedeas to the said ca. sa. upon the said judgment, and wholly superseded the execution of any such writ. And that Mac Guire after giving the said judgment, and before the issuing of any other ca. sa. against him, viz. on 16th November 1801, surrendered himself, &c. in satisfaction of the judgment and in discharge of his bail...
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
-
Snook against Mattock, Executor of Southwood
...Abr. Supersedeas (B), pi. 4, and pi. 10, 11. (i) Skinn. 590. Cited, Com. Dig. Pleader (3, L, 12), p. 762. 1160 THE KING V. WISTOWSampson v. Brown (2 East, 439), Bac. Abr. Supersedeas, D, 5 (vol. vii. page 492, 7th ed.), are among the authorities on the point: and they are certainly somewhat......
-
Underhill v Devereux
...of the word duly. 16 East, 39, Dudlow v. Watcharn. The bail may also plead a writ of error, allowed before the return of the ca. sa. 2 East, 439, Sampson v. Brown. K. B. xiv.-24 738 UNDERBILL V. DBVEREUX 2 WMS. SAUND. 72. levied, if judgment shall be given for the plaintiff upon this record......
-
Doe against Wright
...often pleadable. Thus bail cannot be fixed, pending error ; and they may plead it in bar of a scire facias on the recognisance; Sampson v. Brown (2 East, 439). The sheriff, who executes a fi. fa. after notice of allowance, is liable in trespass, and the writ of error may be [775] replied to......
-
Semb. S. C. Percixall v Coltlow
...is no evidence ; and so he was sworn (a). [S. C. post, p. 425-9.] (a) That allowance is necessary, see 1 Bos. & Pull. 478. 2 Id. 370. 2 East, 439. 3 B. Moo. 83. (a) Either the payment or the acceptance is traversable; Young v. Ruddle, 2 Salk. 627. S. C. 1 Lord Ray. 60. Hawksluiw v. Rawl......