Spong v Wright

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date12 February 1842
Date12 February 1842
CourtExchequer

English Reports Citation: 152 E.R. 265

EXCHEQUER OF PLEAS.

Spong
and
Wright

S. C. 2 Dowl. (N. S.) 545; 12 L. J. Ex. 144.

spong i). wright. Exch. of Pleas. Feb. 12, 1842.-Debt on a bill of exchange by payee against acceptor for 20.-Pleas, first, except as to 101. 11s., parcel &c., a set-off for board and lodging; and as to the sum of 101. Us., payment of that sum.-into Court.-Replication, that the alleged debts and causes of set-off did Ex. Div. vm.-9* 266 SPONG V. WRIGHT 9 M. & W. 630. not accrue within six years before the commencement of the suit, concluding to the country : to which the defendant, by his rejoinder, added the similiter. At the trial, the plaintiff having proved his case, and the defendant his set-oft', the latter put in a letter from the plaintiff to the defendant, in which the following passages were relied upon, to take the case out of the statute :-" Before closing this, I have to request you will be pleased to send me in any bill or what demand you have to make on me, and if just, I shall not give you the trouble of going to law. If you refer to your books, you will find the last payment I made you was in May, 1839: the day I have forgot. I shall leave town to-morrow, but shall be back in a few clays, for a month, and if you will bring my bill in here to me by eleven, I shall be at your service :"-Held, that this was not a sufficient admission to take the case out of the Statute of Limitations.-Held, also, that the issue joined on the replication of the Statute of Limitations was no proper issue, and that there ought to be a repleacler. [S. 0. 2 Dowl. (N. S.) 545; 12 L. J. Ex. 144.] Debt by the drawer against the acceptor of a bill of exchange for .20, payable to the diuwer's own order three months after date, with counts for money lent, and on an account stated. Pleas, first, except as to 101. 11s., parcel &c., a set-off for board and lodging &c. with the following averment:-" which said .sum of money so due to the defendant as aforesaid exceeds tlie supposed debt above demanded, except as in the introductory part of this plea mentioned, and all damages by the plaintiff' sustained by reason of the detention thereof, and out of which said sum he the defendant is ready and willing &c." Verification. And as to the sum of 101. 11s., payment into Court of that sum, and that he the defendant never was indebted to the plaintiff' to a greater amount than the sum of 101. lls., in [630] respect of the cause of action in the introductory part of the plea mentioned. Verification. Replication tu the first plea, that the several alleged debts and causes of set-oft' in the said first plea mentioned did not, nor did any or either of them, accrue to the defendant within six years before the commencement of the suit, concluding to the country. To the second plea the plaintiff replied, taking the money out of Court in satisfaction of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Hodsden against Harridge
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of the King's Bench
    • 1 Enero 1845
    ...6 M. & W. 829, Waugk v. Cope, per Lord Abinger. 8 A. & E. 221, Boutledge v. Ramsay. 3 N. & P. 319, S. C. 9 C. & P. 209, Bucket v. Church. 9 M. & W. 629, Spang v. Wright. 12 M. 6 W. 159, Cripps v. Davies. According to the older authorities, an acknowledgment 692 HODSDEN V. HAREIDGE 2 WMS. 8A......
  • Hayman v Gerrard
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of the King's Bench
    • 1 Enero 1845
    ...to the country is bad; for there is a negative, and no affirmative. 1 Mees. & W. 533, Wheatley v. Williams. I Tyr. & Gr. 1043, S. C. 9 Mees. & W. 629, Spong v. Wright. Secus, as to a plea denying a fact necessarily implied, though not alleged, in a declaration. 6 Mees. & W. 707, Edinburgh R......
  • Bennet v Holbech
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of the King's Bench
    • 1 Enero 1845
    ...nothing on the record equivalent to an averment that the cause of action arose within six years. 1 M. & W. 533, Wheatley v. Williams. 9 M. & W. 629, Spong v. Wright See also 3 Dowl. 698, Wordsworth v. Brown. On the other hand, it has been laid down that a wrong conclusion of a plea, either ......
  • Hancocke vic. Company v Prowd, Administrator of Yope
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of the King's Bench
    • 1 Enero 1845
    ...on the one side met by a negative on the other. 10 M. & W. 735, Bri&coe v. Hill. See also, 1 M. & W. 533, 537, Wheathy v. Williams. 9 M. & W. 629, 635, Spong v. Wright. 6 Bing. N. C. 453, 505, 529, 530, 565, Gwynne v. Burnett. 1 Scott, N. E. 701, S. C. Post, Vol. II. p. 319, notes to Bennet......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT