Vincent v Godson
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 08 February 1850 |
| Date | 08 February 1850 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 64 E.R. 675
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
[717] vincent v. godson. Feb. 8, 1850. Where a creditor of a testator obtained judgment against the executor de bonis testatoris, and a decree was immediately afterwards made in a creditor's suit: Held, that .the executor was not entitled to an injunction to stay execution on the judgment. This was a motion after a decree in a creditor's suit to restrain a creditor from proceeding at law upon a judgment. Mr. Eichard Godson, the testator in the cause, died on the 1st of August 1849, having made his will, and appointed Mr. William Bulkeley Hughes his executor, who proved the will. On the 16th of November 1849 Miss Barbara Maria Best, a bond creditor of the testator, commenced an action against the executor to recover 4000 due to her upon her bond. On the 23d of November Mr. George Vincent, another creditor, filed the bill in the present cause on behalf of [718] himself and all other the creditors of the testator, for the usual administration decree. In order to gain time to obtain a decree in the suit before Miss Best could obtain judgment in her action the executor's solicitor, on the 6th of December 1849, craved oyer of the bond, the practice of the Courts of law being that the Defendants' time to plead does not run in the interval between the craving and granting of oyer; and that a Defendant has as much time to plead after oyer given, as he had at the time of the demand thereof. On the 27th of December, the executor, being under terms to plead issuably, delivered five pleas to the action: first, non est factum; secondly, that the testator 676 VINCENT V. GODSON 3 DE G. & SM. 719. was never indebted; thirdly, plene administravit; fourthly, that the bond was deposited as an escrow with certain persons therein named; and, fifthly, that the bond was given subject to a condition, which had been performed. The Plaintiff in the action, being advised that one of the pleas was not issuable, signed judgment for 10,000 on the 29th of December. On the 31st of December the executor's attorney took out a summons before a Judge at Chambers to set aside the judgment for irregularity. On the 3d of January 1850 the summons was discharged ; but the Judge restrained the Plaintiff at law from taking any further proceedings on the judgment until the third day of the then ensuing Hilary term, to afford the Defendant an opportunity of taking the opinion of the Court on the validity of the judgment. The material parts of the record at law were as follows :-"Whereby, and by reason of the non-payment thereof, an action hath accrued to the Plaintiff to demand and have the same of and from the Defendant as such executor as aforesaid; yet the said Richard Godson deceased, in his lifetime, and the Defendant as executor as aforesaid since the decease of the said Richard Godson, have not nor has either of them paid the said sum [719] above demanded, or any part thereof, to the Plaintiff's damage of five hundred pounds ; and thereupon she brings suit, &c. And, on the 29th day of December, in the year of our Lord 1849, the Defendant, by Eobert Vaughan Wynne Williams, his attorney, says nothing in bar or preclusion of the said action of the said Barbara Maria Best, whereby the said Barbara Maria Best remains therein undefended against the said William Bulkely Hughes; and hereupon the Plaintiff freely here in Court remits to the Defendant all damages which she hath sustained, as well on the occasion of the detention of the said debt as for her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended : Therefore it is considered, that the Plaintiff do recover against the Defendant, as executor as aforesaid, her said debt, to be levied of the goods and chattels which were of the said Richard C. Godson at the time of his death in the hands of the Defendant as executor as aforesaid to be administered, if he hath so much thereof in his hands to be administered." On the 12th of January 1850 the usual decree for administration was made in the suit; and on the 14th notice of it was served upon the attorneys of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reeve v Reeve
...glass, books, prints and paintings, not being heirlooms, and all his watches, trinkets, horses, carriages, harness, wines, liquors and 3DEG.&SM.717. VINCENT V. GODSON 675 provisions, and also all policies of assurance, bonuses and other benefits to arise or be derived therefrom, which might......