Snow v Townsend
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 24 April 1815 |
| Date | 24 April 1815 |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
English Reports Citation: 128 E.R. 980
Common Pleas Division
S. C. 1 Marsh. 477.
990 SNOW V. TOWNSEND 6 TAUNT. 123. [123] SNOW V. TOWNSEND. April 24, 1815. [S. C. 1 Marsh. 477.] The Court will not prevent one who has assigned his property under an insolvent act from suing for a debt due to him before his assignment, the assignee refusing to sue. Nor will the Court compel the Plaintiff to give security for costs. The Plaintiff had been discharged out of prison under the insolvent act, and had under that act assigned to the person who sued him all his property. Many persons were indebted to him before his assignment, and his assignee refusing to sue them, he had commenced the present action against one of his creditors. Blosset Serjt,, moved that either the proceedings might be staid, upon the ground that the right of suit was now vested in the Plaintiff's assignee only ; or else that at least the Plaintiff might give security for costs, which he claimed on the authority of Webb v. Ward (7 Term Rep. 296). Per Curiani. Either the Plaintiff can maintain an action for this debt, or he cannot. If be can, there is no reason why the Court should interfere to prevent him from so doing : if he cannot, it will he matter of defence. As to security for costs, the case cited has been much questioned, and besides, it materially differs from this. There the Plaintiff was suing for the benefit of his assignees, who ought not to be permitted, if unsuccessful, to shelter themselves from costs behind the bankrupt's poverty; here the Plaintiff sues, because the assignee will not sue. Rule refused. [124] BROWNE v. ROSE. April 25, 1815. [S. C. 1 Marsh. 478.] The memorial of an annuity stated the names of two witnesses as attesting the execution of an annuity-deed, who also attested the execution of a warrant of attorney for further securing the annuity, but that fact was not noticed in the memorial : Held that the names of all the witnesses were sufficiently stated. A memorial of an annuity-deed stated the contract, and payment of the price, and that for the considerations aforesaid, and for further and better securing the annuity, the grantor demised to J. T. W. upon the trusts in the indenture expressed : Held that it sufficiently appeared for whom J. T. W. was a trustee.The memorial of an annuity needs not to state the names of the attornies to whom a warrant to confess judgment is given.If a memorial of an annuity be defective in stating one of several...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
George Frederick Mowlds, Attorney, v Robert Lynch Power
...P. 169. Laroche v. WakemanENR 1 Peake, N. P. 190. Taylor v. Buchanan 4 B.& C. 419. Kitchen v. BartschENR 7 East, 53. Snow v. TownsendENR 6 Taunt. 123. Webb v. WardENR 7 T. R. 296. Webb v. FoxENR 7 T. R. 391. Fowler v. DownENR 1 Bos. & P. 4. Laroche v. WakemanENR Peake, N. P. 190. Silk v. Os......
-
The Queen against Martin and Wife
...and no special excuse is made for the delay. Nor is this in itself a case in which security for costs can be demanded, Snow v. Townsend (6 Taunt. 123). Sir W. W. Follett, contra. This is not a question of indulgence, but of right, under the practice of the Court. No affidavit of merits is r......
-
Elston v Braddick
...and no special excuse is made for the delay. Nor is this in itself a case in which security for costs can be demanded, Snow v. Townsend (6 Taunt. 123). Sir W. W. Follett, contra. This is not a question of indulgence, but of right, under the practice of the Court. No affidavit of merits is r......
-
Goatley v Emmott
...this court refused to compel security for costs, on the ground that the plaintiff was a bankrupt, or in Newgate. So, in Snow v. Townsend, 6 Taunt. 123, 1 Marsh. 477, it was held, that the court will not prevent one who has assigned his property under an insolvent act from suing for a debt d......