Page images



clause of attestation, and was signed

III. Of the Day. by M. and his surety, and handed to 1. Costs of the day for not proD. The next morning, upon M.

ceeding to trial, may be obtained as and D. requesting plaintiff to give up

a separate part of the order for disthe possession, he refused to give up

charging a rule for judgment as in the place; but there was evidence case of a nonsuit, but not as a conthat, on that day, Mi's cattle were on

dition for discharging that rule. Lenthe lands, and that plaintiff's were

niker v. Barr,

473 not. Plaintiff kept possession of the 2. A term's notice is not necessary house for three weeks, when he was before motion for costs of the day. turned out by a constable. The note | French v. Burton, was never attested, and it was not proved how the plaintiff got it into his possession :Held, in an action

IV. On Summons. by the plaintiff against the makers

A Judge at Chambers has no of the note, that a jury were war

power to give costs on summons. ranted in saying that the bargain had

Spicer v. Todd, been complied with on the part of the plaintiff. Evans v. Morgan, 453

V. After Trial.

Semble, where costs are ordered to COSTS.

abide the event, neither party has the I. Security for.

costs of the first trial, unless the ver

dicts are both for the same party, 1. Security for costs may be ap- |

Canham v. Fish.

126 plied for, after an order for time to plead. Wilson v. Minchin, 87 2. The Court will not order se

VI. Taxation of curity for costs, on the ground of

See Attorney. one of the plaintiffs being resident abroad, where another of the plaintiffs 1. Reasonable costs of serving a is resident in this country. Anony- notice of taxation will be allowed; mous,

88 and is the defendant reside in the 3. Where the plaintiff is out of the country, and has not employed an jurisdiction of the Court, a motion attorney, an attorney may be emfor security of costs may be made ployed in the country to serve him without a previous application to the with a notice of taxing costs. Thorp plaintiff's attorney; but, without such without such v. Warby,

488 an application, the rule nisi will not be I 2. The rule H. T. 2 Will. 4, s. 74, a stay of proceedings. Jones v. Jones, is prospective, and applies to all tax

207 | ations after the commencement of 4. A defendant, who moves for se- | Easter Term. Cox v. Thomason, 498 curity for costs, need not state the 3. Where the general issue is pleaded stage of the proceedings; it rests to a declaration containing several with the plaintiff to show that the counts, it tenders a distinct issue application is too late. Ibid. | upon each count; and, upon tax

ation, the defendant, under the R. H.

2 Will. 4, s. 74, is entitled to the II. When, and how restricted.

costs of those counts found for him. See Court or REQUESTS.




1. A defendant residing in Bath, against whom a verdict for less than 101. has been recovered, is entitled to enter a suggestion on the roll, to deprive the plaintiff of costs, under the 45 Geo. 3, c. 47, although the plaintiff resides in London, and the cause of action has not arisen within the jurisdiction of the Bath Court of Requests, established by that act. Graham v. Browne,

327 2. The verdict of the jury is, in general, the criterion of the amount due from the defendant to the plaintiff, by which the Court is to be regulated in entering a suggestion to give the defendant costs. Drew v. Coles,

505 3. The Bradford Court of Requests Act gives jurisdiction to that Court, where the debt demanded does not exceed 5l., which means a rightful demand; and if the plaintiff sue elsewhere, and recover less than 5l., the defendant will be entitled to costs.


and settled “ All those the capital mansion-house, messuage, or tenement, with the several out-offices, gardens, plantations, and hereditaments thereunto belonging, commonly called or known by the name of Cefn Coch; and also those fields, closes, pieces or parcels of land or ground and hereditaments (eight in number), commonly called or known by the several names, &c. (naming them), being parts and parcels of the demesne lands of Cefn Coch, in the holding or occupation of T. M., together with all and singular houses, out-houses, edifices, buildings, &c., lands, meadows, &c., hereditaments and appurtenances whatsoever, to the said capital messuages, tenements, lands, hereditaments, and premises belonging, or in anywise appertaining, or therewith or with any part or parcel thereof usually set, let, held, occupied, or enjoyed, or accepted, reputed, taken, or known for, as part, parcel, or member thereof, or appurtenant thereto, or to any part or parcel thereof." Upon the death of W. M., T. M. entered into possession of the property not conveyed by W. M., and suffered a recovery of, and settled, the mills and lands thereunto belonging by the following description :-"All that corn-mill, with the appurtenants called Melin Cefn Coch, and the lands thereunto belonging, and then better known by the name of Tyddyn y felin Cefn Coch, and all that fulling-mill called Pandi Cefn Coch; and all those five fields, closes, pieces, or parcels of land, part of Tyddyn y felin Cefn Coch, containing by estimation thirtyfour acres, or thereabouts, and all houses, &c., and all lands, &c., in which T. M. had any estate, and the reversion and reversions, &c., and all the estate, &c., of T. M.” The five fields, part of the Cefn Coch property not named in the recovery


I. Construction and Operation of.

See EJECTMENT. 1. W. M., tenant in tail of the Cefn Coch property, which consisted of a mansion-house and thirteen closes, formerly in one occupation, a corn-mill called Melin Cefn Coch, and a fulling-mill called Pandi Cefn Coch, with the lands thereunto belonging, in 1816 suffered a recovery, and in the recovery deed declared his intention to convey the property thereinafter particularly mentioned,

deed of 1816, consisted of about occupation will not vitiate. Wilkinthirty-four acres :-Held, that the son v. Malin and Others, 636 previous particular enumeration in the deed of 1816 confined the ope II. Fraudulent and Void. ration of the subsequent general words, and that the mansion house

An administratrix, being indebted and eight fields only passed by that

to an attorney for rent, executed to deed :-Held, also, that the five

him a mortgage of leasehold property fields, formerly parcel of Cefn Coch,

belonging to her intestate, which and not named in the recovery deed

falsely recited that 3001. was paid as of 1816, passed by the recovery deed

a consideration; the next of kin, not of 1824 by the description of “ All

knowing the facts, were induced, by those five fields, &c.Doe d. Mey- misrepresentation, to execute the rick v. Meyrick,


mortgage ; and the jury at the trial 2. James I. granted to R. T.

found that the deed had not been and his heirs the King's manor and

fairly obtained :-Held, that the town of Aullon, and the King's hun

mortgagee was not entitled to recover dred of Aulton, with its rights, and

in ejectment against the next of kin, all other things to the said manor

because of the fraud, nor against the and hundred belonging; and also,

administratrix, who was the widow that they should have free warren

of the intestate, because the accounts and free chase in all their demesne

of the estate had not been wound up. lands in the hundred, manor, town,

Doe d. Woodhead v. Fallows and tenements, and hereditaments afore


481 said, and on all other lands and woods being in the same hundred, III. Inspection and Production of. &c., although the same demesne and 1. Where one part of a document and other lands were within the

has been lost, the Court will compel King's forest, &c. :Held, that this

the party holding the other part, or grant did not confer a right of free

| his attorney if he holds it, to produce warren over the King's lands within

it at the Stamp Office, for the purthe hundred, but that the term " de

| pose of having it stamped, though it mesne lands” applied to lands held

is not held on any trust for the party by R. T. as lord of the manor of

applying. Neale v. Swind, 278 Aulton; and that “ other lands" ap.

2. If two parts of an agreement plied to tenemental lands held by

be interchangeably executed between R. T. in fee of the King, or of

landlord and tenant, in an action any other lord, within the limits of

upon the agreement by a purchaser the grant. The Attorney-General v.

of the premises, the Court will not Parsons,


compel the tenant to produce his 3. The term “demesne lands” pro

part to be stamped, unless such purperly signifies lands of a manor which

chaser has applied to the vendor, or the lord either has or potentially may

used every endeavour, without suchave in propriis manibus. Ibid.

cess, to find him. Travis v. Collins, 4. Where the words of a second

625 deed are sufficient to pass the whole of the property conveyed by a former deed, and the intention to do so is

DESCENT. clear; a mistake in describing the


« PreviousContinue »