Your World of Legal Intelligence
 United Kingdom | +44 (0) 20 7284 8080

Totty v Nesbitt

Nominate Series English Reports Cited in 5 Precedent Map Related
Vincent
JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date01 January 1788
Date01 January 1788
CourtCourt of the King's Bench

English Reports Citation: 100 E.R. 505

IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH

Totty
and
Nesbitt

(c) Tatty v. Nesbitt. Tr. 24 Geo. 3, B. R. Peckham moved for a rule to shew cause why the defendant should not wave his demanrl of oyer and plead. This was an action on a bond. The plaintiff' had before filed a bill in the Exchequer for a discovery, and the defendant in his answer admitted that he had executed such a bond, and that he had destroyed it. Duller, J.-You have declared with a profert; and after that the Court cannot say that the defendant shall not have oyer. You should have declared that the bond was destroyed, and then it would have appeared on the record that the defendant was not entitled to oyer. All we can do for you is to order that the production of a copy shall be oyer. But the plaintiff having no copy of the bond...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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