William Dolphin and Katharine His Wife, Appellants; Francis Haynes, Respondent
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1697 |
| Date | 01 January 1697 |
| Court | House of Lords |
English Reports Citation: 1 E.R. 12
House of Lords
Mew's Dig. vii. 1504; 16 Lds. Jo. 192.
[17] william dolphin and katharine his wife, Appellants; fbancis haynes, Respondent [1697]. [Mew's Dig. vii. 1504; 16 Lds. Jo. 192.] monet charged in equity upon the person who had the benefit of it.- Appeal to be relieved against a Decree in Chancery made by the Master of the Rolls, Nov. 10. 1696. The Case was thus, That one Paris Slaughter of London, being Guardian to Katharine the Appellant during her Infancy, he placed her with his Kinsman Chambers Slaughter near Worcester, and sometimes boarded her in that Place for her Education; and the Respondent and the said P.S. being Correspondents, Paris Slaughter ordered the Respondent to pay the said Chambers what Sums should be called for upon the Account of Katharine: In pursuance whereof several Sums were paid upon her Account, and the same were allowed again to the Respondent by P. S. The Appellant Katharine having just attained her Age, she came to the Respondent, and desired more Money, as by the Order of P. S. and accordingly two several Sums were paid her, and Receipts taken from her, as by the Order of P. S. The Appellant Katharine did afterwards come to an Account with P. S. which was fairly stated in Writing, and they executed General Releases each to the other: But the said two Sums not being entred in the Books of P.. S. were not accounted for by the Appellant Katharine; and the Respondent not having received any Allowance from P. S. in his Life-time, nor having, as he thought, any sufficient Orders to charge the Executor of P. S. with, he prefers his Bill against the Appellants, and by her Answer she own'd the Receipt of the two Sums, but by Order of I'. S. and afterwards, upon hearing of the Cause, The Court declared that there appearing no positive Orders from P. S. for these two Sums, the Appellants ought to pay the Principal, Interest and Costs: And a Decree was made accordingly. argument for appellants.-And now it was argued on the Behalf of the Appellants, That this was not just, because the Respondent never paid any Money to any Body while Katharine boarded with him, or afterwards, but by the Order and upon the Credit of P. S. and charged it to his Account; and the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Morrisons / McColl's merger inquiry
...Dorking, RH5 4HH 10. Perth Oakbank Road 168a Oakbank Road, Perth, PH1 1HA 11. Bolton Newbrook Road 58 Newbrook Road, Over Hulton, Bolton, BL5 1ER 12. Ottery St Mary Yonder 2-4 Yonder Street, Ottery St Mary, EX11 1HD 13. Rogerstone St Johns Crescent 33-35 St. John's Crescent, Rogerstone, New......
-
Appeals and Writs
...citations to a multi-volume ER must now include the volume number.145 The new rule provides the following examples of this format: "1-ER-12" and "4-ER-874-76."146 As a result, practitioners should budget more time at the end of the drafting process to insert record citations. Given the new ......