Woods v Durrant
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1846 |
| Date | 01 January 1846 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 153 E.R. 1137
IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. 16 L. J. Ex. 313.
[149] vacation sittings after michaelmas term. woods v. dukra.nt. Nov. 27, 1846.-Trespass for breaking and entering plaintiff's dwelling-house, locking the doors, and expelling the plaintiff. Plea, justifying all the trespasses except the expulsion under a distress for rent, alleging that defendant kept and impounded it in the dwelling-house, &c., and in order safely to impound and keep it, necessarily locked and fastened the doors of the dwelling-house, and afterwards caused the goods to be duly appraised and duly sold in satisfaction of the rent and costs of distress and sale. Replication, that defendant broke &c. the house, locked the doors, and seized, took, and converted the goods of his own wrong and for another and different purpose than that mentioned in the plea, i.e. for the purpose of ejecting &c. the plaintiff from the possession of the dwelling-house, concluding with a verification. Demurrer. Semble, that the replication was bad for not traversing defendant's entry for the purpose of distraining, and concluding to the country, instead of raising an immaterial issue on the intention of the defendant in entering.- Semble, also, that the plea need not aver notice of the distress, with the cause of the taking, to have been given according to 2 Will. & Mary, sess. 1, c. 5, a. 1, and that the plea, having perfectly answered the seizure, was not rendered bad in substance by going on unnecessarily to answer matters of mere aggravation laid in the declaration, viz. the conversion of plaintiff's goods.-Held, that the plea should have shewn that the house, or that part of it of which the doors were locked, was the most n't and convenient place for securing the distress, or the tenant might be improperly kept out of possession. [S. C. 16L. J. Ex. 313.] Trespass for breaking and entering the plaintiff's dwelling house, locking, fastening, arid bolting the doors of the said dwelling house, ejecting, expelling, putting out, and removing the plaintiff from the possession, use, occupation, and enjoyment thereof, and keeping him so ejected, &c. till the commencement of the suit, and during that time, to wit on &c., seizing and taking certain specified goods of the plaintiff, and carrying away and converting and disposing thereof to defendant's own use ; by means of which premises the plaintiff was deprived of the use and benefit of his dwelling-house, and was prevented from carrying on his trade and business of a brewer therein. Second plea,(a) (except as to ejecting, expelling, &c. the plaintiff' from the possession &c., and keeping and continuing him so expelled &c., as in the declaration alleged), that the plaintiff, before and at the times when v.c., held, occupied, &c., and enjoyed the said dwelling-house in [150] which &c., as tenant thereof to the defendant (see Drew v. Avery, 13 M. & W. 399), by virtue of a certain demise thereof made by the defendant to the plaintiff for the term of one year from the 29th of September, 1840, and then on from year to year until the plaintiff or defendant should give to or leave for the other of them six months' notice in writing to quit, at the yearly rent of 21, payable quarterly in each year of such tenancy. Averment, that, after the making of the demise, and during the continuance of the tenancy, and before the said time when &c., to wit, on &c., 21 of the rent aforesaid, for one year of the tenancy ending on the 25th of March, 1845, became and was due and in arrear from plaintiff to defendant; " whereupon the defendant afterwards, and during the continuance of the said tenancy, to wit, on &c., entered into the said dwelling-house in (a) The other pleas were, first, not guilty ; thirdly, to the breaking and entering, that the dwelling-house was iiot plaintiff's; fourthly, to same, liberum teiiementum; fifthly, to seizing and taking the goods, &c,, that they were not plaintiff's ; sixthly, leave and license. 11)38 WOODS V. DURRANT 16M, &W. 181. which &c., the outer door of the same being open, to distrain for the said arrears of rent, and did then and there distrain the goods and chattels in the declaration mentioned, then being in the said dwelling-house in which &c., and then being subject to i such distress, as and for a distress for the said arrears of rent, and kept and impounded the same (h) in and upon the nai/l...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Abingdon Rural District Council v O'Gorman
...and in 1774 by Lord Mansfield in Washborn v. Black, reported in 11 East, page 405 note (a), and accepted in 1846 by Baron Parke in Woods v. Durrant ((1846) 16 W. & M. 158), and by Chief Baron Pollock in Smith v. Ashforth (1860) 29 L.J, Ex. p. 259). So far as the tenant was concerned, howeve......
-
Mary Gale, Executrix of John Ware, against Lewis
...Sugden). (II) 13 M. & W. 137. See also Bmzi v. Stewart, 4 Man. & G. 295. (n) 1 Ventr. 217. See dictum of Parke B. in Woods v. Dwrant, 16 M, & W, 149, 165. 1460 GALE V. LEWIS 9 Q. B. 741. subject: yet we think that the question, as submitted to the jury, leaves the matter somewhat too much a......
-
Davison against Wilson and Others
...several matters were pleadable under stat. 4 Ann. c. 16, s. 4), to (d) 3 T. R. 297 ; cited in Taylor v. Cole. See Woods v. Durrani, 16 M. & W. 149, 155. (a) 3 T. E. 292. Judgment affirmed in Exch. Ch.; Taylor v. Cole, 1 H. Bl. 555. 710 DAVISON U. WtLSON 11Q B. 899. deny the "force and arms,......
-
Thomas Webster Tennant against Augusta Field
...jury might infer from circumstances the consent of the distrainee to a departure from this rule. And, accordingly, in Woods v. Durrani (16 M. & W. 149) Parke B. says that Washborn v. Blade(V) "is an authority, that, in common cases, a party distraining in a dwelling house must not take the ......