The Revised Reports; Being a Republication of Such Cases in the English Courts of Common Law and Equity

The Revised Reports; Being a Republication of Such Cases in the English Courts of Common Law and Equity : From the Year 1785, as Are Still of Practical Utility Volume 51

By (author) 

List price: US$20.76

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 usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1901 edition. Excerpt: ... Municipal Corporations Act, 5 & 6 (1) One of the grounds on which the arguing the rule the counsel for the rule was obtained was the admission defendant gave up this objection. of an inhabitant freeman as a 'itne.s (2) Friday, 1'ehruar_v 5th. Before to prove the right claimed by the Lord Denman, Ch.J., and Patteson, J. plaintifi. The Loan Onlni-' BAXRON (3) C1'o.Eliz.335. received his testimony, and indorsed (4) 22 R. R. 800 (2 B. & Ald. 360). his name on the record. Upon Will. IV. c. 76. B_ut there is no legal distinction between the old and the new corporation. That Act preserves the identity of corporations, though it regulates them for the future, and prevents the further admission of freemen on the old qualification except in certain cases. There is nothing to alter the mode of claiming those rights which are continued to them; the claim must therefore be alleged in pleading as it was before the Act; that is, the defendant must prescribe in the corporation, as was done in Mellor v. Spateman (1). Sir W. W. Follett, Humfrey, and Waddingtou, contra: Ricketts v. Salwey (2) is decisive against the plaintiff. That case shows that it is enough to prove part of the allegations in the declaration, provided the part so proved will support the action. If, therefore, the plaintiff claims common in respect of close A. and close B., it is enough to show his title to it in respect of A., where that right has been disturbed. But if he claims one entire right of common over A. and B., it vill not be sufficient to prove it over either alone; for a recovery on such a declaration would be evidence of the larger right claimed, instead of the lesser right to which he was found to be entitled. So, if the plaintifl had alleged a right for...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 342 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 18mm | 612g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236958160
  • 9781236958167