Reports of Cases Argued and Ruled at Nisi Prius; In the Courts of King's Bench, and Common Pleas, from Easter Term 43 Geo. III 1803, to Michaelmas Term 46 Geo. III. 1806

Reports of Cases Argued and Ruled at Nisi Prius; In the Courts of King's Bench, and Common Pleas, from Easter Term 43 Geo. III 1803, to Michaelmas Term 46 Geo. III. 1806

By (author) 

List price: US$19.99

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1808 edition. Excerpt: ... v. RAWLINS and Another. May 20th. rT,"HIS was an action against the Defendants as if the deciara, Sheriff of Middlesex, for a false return. tin forTM false Plea of Not Guilty. gZZ&t' The Declaration stated, That a writ of Ft-fa had out the writ' Si'i, -i i i' i states the in lssued, which was indorsed to levy 600/. together dorsement to with the sheriffs' poundage, officers' fees, and other together with legal charges and incidental expences attending the elnS&'& t&tty. cers' fees, and The office copy of the writ was produced, and cfrargeslnd given in evidence, but it was indorsed "to levy mcidenta- ' J pences attend 600/. together with the sheriffs'poundage, officers' i-g e same, . and the writ fees, et Cetera" when produced!It was objected that this was a variance, the words inm, 'm, in the declaration, "other legal charges and ex-vf!!h lhe st-, .. "ffs poundage, pences attending the levy," not being found in the officers-rees, indorsement on the writ, in which were the words et ceteraonly. Sec. it is a It was answered, that the words et cetera comprehended what were the legal and incidental charges, and that the Plaintiff might therefore set out at length, what was the legal import of the words in the shape in which they stood in the indorsement. Lord Ellenborough said, That he was of opinion, that the production of the writ did not support the declaration, and non-suited the Plaintiff on the ground of the variance, with leave to move to set it aside. Erskine and Wood for the Plaintiff. Garrow and Gibbs for the Defendant. PETO v. HAGUE. What is said by an agent respecting a contract or other matter in the course of his employment, which contract or matter is the foundation of...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 66 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 4mm | 136g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • Miami Fl, United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236643224
  • 9781236643223