Taylor against Henniker, Baronet
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 24 June 1840 |
| Date | 24 June 1840 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 113 E.R. 897
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
S. C. 4 P. & D. 243; 9 L. J. Q. B. 383. Overruled, Tancred v. Leyland, 1851, 16 Q. B. 680.
UAD.&B.M9. TAYLOR V. HENNIKER 897 taylor against henniker, baronet. Wednesday, June 24th, 1840. Where a landlord distrains for more than is due for rent, an action on the case lies at the suit of the tenant, though the goods distrained are of less value than the rent really due; and it is no defence that, after distress and notice thereof, and before the aale, the landlord served a second notice on the tenant, stating the amount really due, and that the distress was taken for that amount only, and would be sold unless that amount was paid. [S. C. 4 P. & D. 243; 9 L. J. Q. B. 383. Overruled, Tancred v. Leyhnd, 1851, 16 Q. B. 680.] Case by tenant against his landlord, for that the defendant, falsely and maliciously pretending that a large sum, to wit 1651. 2s. 3d., was due and in arrear for rent, wrongfully seized and took the grass of the plaintiff growing on the demised premises, as a distress for the said sum pretended to be due, and sold it for satisfying the alleged arrears and coats of distress; whereas only a small part thereof, to wit, 401., was in fact due and in arrear. Plea: not guilty (by statute). On the trial at the Essex Spring Assizes, before Littledale J., it appeared that the seizure was made, and notice of distress given, on llth of July 1838, for the arrears of rent stated in the declaration. Oti 1st of August following and before the sale, the defendant, having mowed and laid up the crop on the premises, served a fresh notice on the plaintiff, that he had distrained the crops on llth of July for the sum of 801. 2a. 3d. only, and that the same would be sold, unless that amount was paid or the property replevied. [489] The latter was the true amount of the rent in arrear, being a less sum per annum than was originally claimed. The proceeds of the sale were insufficient to satisfy the rent actually due. The jury found a verdict far the plaintiff, damages la., subject to a motion to enter a nonsuit. In the following Easter term, Platt obtained a rule nisi accordingly, citing Wilkinson, v. Terry (1 M. & Rob. 377). In this vacation (b). Thesiger and Petersdorff now shewed cause. In PPilkinson v. Terry (1 M. & Rob. 377), the jury found for the plaintiff, and the defendants were left to avail themselves of the doubt thrown out by Parke B. at a future...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sophia De Medina against Grove and Weymouth
...ibid. 566 ; Sinclair v. Eldred, 4 Taunt. 7 ; Mercer v. Sparks, Owen, 51; Field v. MUchell, 6 Esp. N. P. C. 71 ; Taylor v. Henniker, 12 A. & E. 488 ; Lewis v. Morris, 2 C. & M. 712; S. C. 4 Tyrwh. 907 ; Pwter v. Weston, 5 New Ca. 715; Heywood v. Collinge, 9 A. & E. 268; Cmnfoot v. Fowke, 6 M......
-
De Medina v Grove
...ibid. 566 ; Sinclair v. Eldred, 4 Taunt. 7 ; Mercer v. Sparks, Owen, 51; Field v. MUchell, 6 Esp. N. P. C. 71 ; Taylor v. Henniker, 12 A. & E. 488 ; Lewis v. Morris, 2 C. & M. 712; S. C. 4 Tyrwh. 907 ; Pwter v. Weston, 5 New Ca. 715; Heywood v. Collinge, 9 A. & E. 268; Cmnfoot v. Fowke, 6 M......
-
Pryce v Belcher
...the commissioners of a lottery for not adjudging a prize to the holder of a ticket entitled to receive it. So, in Taylor v. Henniker (12 Ad. & E. 488), it was held, that, where a landlord distrains for more than is due for rent, an action on the case lies at the suit of the tenant, though t......
-
Stevenson and Another v Newnham
...count being bad. It was expressly decided by the Exchequer Chamber, in Tancred v. Leyland, 16 Q. B. 669,-overruling Taylor v. Nenniker, 12 Ad. & E. 488, 4 P. & D. 242, and adopting the opinions expressed by Lord Tenterden in Avenell v. Croker, M. & M. 172, and by Parke, B., -in Wilkinson v.......