| 1469.121 |
1469 |
Common Pleas |
Account |
|
| Mich. |
9 |
Edw. 4 |
32 |
45a-46a |
Jenney, William Sjt Genney (for P?)
Nedeham, John JCP Nedham
Littleton, Thomas JCP
Choke, Richard JCP
Moyle, Walter JCP Moile
Choke, Richard JCP
Danby, Robert CJCP
Pygot, Richard Sjt Pigot (mentioned)
Bryan, Thomas Sjt Brian (mentioned twice)
Choke, Richard JCP (mentioned)
Pygot, Richard Sjt Pigot (for D)
Bryan, Thomas Sjt Brian (mentioned thrice)
Jenney, William Sjt Genney
Littleton, Thomas Sjt
Jenney, William Sjt Genney
Littleton, Thomas Sjt
others auters
Pygot, Richard Sjt Pigot
Jenney, William Sjt Genney
Moyle, Walter JCP Moile |
|
|
|
|
|
Roskynner, payor
at Stile, J., hypothetical bailee |
London (Londres)
Cornwall (Cornewall, Cornewal or C.)
Westminster, in Middlesex county
Middlesex, County of
Southwark (Southwarke)
Essex |
|
| Fitzherbert Accompt 13 |
8 Hen. 6, in Detinue (fol. 11)
4 Hen. 6, fol. 16
20 Edw. 4, fol. 12
4 Hen. 6, fol. 62
22 Hen. 6, fol. 54 (thrice)
12 Edw. 4, fol. 12, 14
34 Hen. 6, fol. 4
1429.108 = Mich. 8 Hen. 6, pl. 24, fol. 10a-10b, (not fol. 11)
39 Hen. 6, fol. 9
39 Hen. 6, fol. 63
4 Hen. 6, fol. 2 (twice)
9 Hen. 6, fol. 62, 63
39 Hen. 6, fol. 46
20 Hen. 6, fol. 17
7 Hen. 6, fol. 37
34 Hen. 6, fol. 5
22 Hen. 6, fol. 62
Mich. 41 Edw. 3, Fitzherbert Accompt 34 (?)
14 Hen. 4, fol. 20, Brooke Accompt 34 (?) |
6 Ric. 2 (1382), [stat. 1,] ch. 2 (writs of Debt and Account shall be brought in their proper counties, and a plea that the contract was made in another county would abate the writ) |
| En Accompt le plaintiff suppose que le defendant resceust x. markes d' un Roskynn' a |
71 |
Plaintiff's writ supposed that defendant had received 10 marks from a named payor at London to render account to plaintiff, and plaintiff counted of various other receipts.
Defendant pleaded as to the 10 marks defendant received them in another county from the named payor, which defendant had delivered to plaintiff, denying that defendant was ever plaintiff's receiver of the 10 marks at London in the manner and form (plaintiff's writ supposed).
Plaintiff (?) replied that defendant should have denied that defendant had ever received 10 marks at London since defendant had received them in the other county.
Nedeham JCP said that the plea was bad.
Littleton JCP and Choke JCP and Moyle JCP said that the plea was good.
Defendant argued that if defendant could not plead this defendant might be charged twice.
Plaintiff argued defendant's plea was not good pleading.
Further discussion of the pleading.
Then defendant pleaded that defendant received the 10 marks by the hand of the named payor in the other county, and then defendant delivered them to plaintiff, and defendant fully accounted for them, and did this before plaintiff, denying that defendant was plaintiff's receiver in London.
Plaintiff (?) replied that this plea amounted only to 'fully accounted'.
Moyle JCP said that this (plea) had been adjudged good in bar of account. |
Littleton JCP: a tiel enten que le jury ne serra enveigle (= misled, blinded) d' enquerer de chose hors de lour County, mes serra mis en certein s' il fuit fait en le County
Choke JCP: pur l enveigling del jury, & auxint pur le mischief del party, car si le trespas fuit fait en auter County, & il plede rien culpable, s' ils trover que il est culpable, ils diont 'verum sacram-'; mes le jury ne serra chase de trover chose hors de lour County, per que il est bone de faire l' issue auxi certain comitate il poit |
Nedeham JCP: this is no plea, because one cannot plead (dire) that the contract was made in another county, and thus plead in abatement of the writ, because the statute (6 Ric. 2 (1382), stat. 1, ch. 2) only applies (n' entende, mes) where it appears by the writ (that) (not '&') the contract was made in another county, etc., but previously (devant ces heures), the usage has been to make examination where the contract (was made), and on this to abate the writ, if it were in another county, but this is not the usage now, etc.; and Sir, I understand in such a case that he (defendant) cannot make make the county part (parcel) of the issue nor in any action on a contract, etc., but in Trespass for battery he (a defendant) can justify in another county, denying that he was guilty where the trespass was supposed, because this (trespass) could be continuing, and in this case if he (Roskynner?) had paid the money (deniers), he (defendant) can allege this in any county he wants, without taking a denial (sans ceo), etc.
Littleton JCP: it seems the plea is good, because this traverse is not in abatement, but in bar of the action, of the receipt supposed by the writ; and in an action of Debt on a contract, the defendant can say that it (the contract) be (made) in same county, where the contract was made on a condition that he (defendant) had performed, judgment if action, and if the contract was made in another county on a condition, he (defendant) can plead this, and that the condition is performed, denying that it (the contract) was made where he (plaintiff) had supposed by the writ, and thus making (faire) the county part (parcel) (of the issue), etc., in such respect (a tiel entent) that the jury will not be misled (enveigle) to inquire into a thing (done) outside of their county, but it will be put with certainty whether it (the contract) was made in the county;
see 8 Hen. 6 in Detinue, such a case as he (Littleton JCP?) said (1429.108 = Mich. 8 Hen. 6, pl. 24, fol. 10a-10b)
Choke JCP (in agreement): in Trespass for battery, one can make the county part of the issue where he admitted (conust) the trespass of the same nature in another county, and the same day, to (avoid?) misleading (pur l enveigling del jury), and also for the mischief (there would otherwise? be) to the party, because if the trespass was committed in another county, and he (defendant) pleads 'not guilty', if they (the jury) find that he (defendant) is guilty, they (the jury) say 'the truth on oath' ('verum sacram[entum]'), that is to say, whether he (defendant) beat him (plaintiff), etc., and not whether he (defendant) beat him (plaintiff) in the place (plaintiff supposed), etc., so Attaint does not lie on this verdict, etc., but the jury will nont be driven (chase) to find a thing outside of their county, so it is good to make the issue as certain as he (defendant) can, etc.
Moyle JCP: in your case of Trespass committed in another county than where the writ is brought, if he (defendant) be found guilty he (defendant) will have Attaint, because they (the jury) ought not find a thing outside of their county, because otherwise the defendant will be at mischief, because the plaintiff can afterwards bring a new action in the county where the trespass was committed, and it will be no plea (for defendant) to plead this recovery, becuase it cannot be understood (entende) the same trespass, so he (defendant) will be twice charged, etc., but if I (a plaintiff) bring a writ of Trespass (against me) for breaking my close and felling my trees at Westminster in the county of Middlesex, it is no plea that the plaintiff gave me (defendant) trees growing at Southwark, so I (defendant) cut them, denying that I (defendant) cut them at Westminster, this is no plea, because this trespass cannot have been committed elsewhere than at Westminster, etc., but it seems in this case the denial (sans ceo) is void
Choke JCP: if I declare that the defendant was my receiver to render account, it is no plea for him (defendant) to plead (adire) that he (defendant) received the money (deniers) to bail (pur bailler) to one J. at Stile, to whom he had bailed them, judgment, etc. because by my (plaintiff's) count it is supposed that he (defendant) was my receiver to render me (plaintiff) account directly (immediate), and also he (defendant) proved by his plea when he had performed the condition, etc., he was not bound (tenus) to render me (plaintiff) account, so in this case he (defendant) ought to plead (adire) denying (sans ceo) that he was his (plaintiff's) receiver in another manner, but in this case he (defendant) ought to have the denial (sans ceo), inasmuch as he (plaintiff) had alleged the payment to be made to the plaintiff, so this goes in discharge of the account and not in bar, etc.
Danby CJCP (in agreement): if I bail goods to Sjt Pygot to bail (them) to Sjt Bryan, and no day is delimited (limitte) when this ought to be done, etc., I do not have cause to have account, until Sjt Bryan has refused them or (until) he be dead, so that they (the goods) cannot be bailed to him (Sjt Bryan), and if in such a case I bring my action, it will be no plead to plead the matter 'as above' without taking a denial (sans ceo), as Choke JCP has said
Sjt Pygot (for D): in your case you (Danby CJCP) will have an action against me every time, if I will not deliver them, because against you I have no cause to have them (for myself), and you cannot have another action except Account; and Sir, if goods be delivered to me by you (Danby CJCP) to deliver to Sjt Bryan, either of you can have an action of Account against me, etc.; and if you bring an action, it will be a good plea that you (plaintiff) delivered them to me to deliver to Sjt Bryan, to whom I delivered them, without taking a denial (sans ceo), because I admit (confesse) that I was accountable conditionally, etc., that is, if I did not deliver over to Sjt Bryan, but in this case you (plaintiff) ought to make the count part of the issue, because if he (plaintiff) recovered against you (defendant) on this receipt supposed in London, he (plaintiff) can bring another action in Cornwall, so we (defendant) will be twice charged, etc.
Sjt Jenney (for P?): so one could make the county part (parcel) (of the issue) in every case according to you (pur vous) (defendant), and this cannot be, because according to you (pur vous) this receipt in Cornwall cannot be the same receipt on which the action was conceived, thus you did not plead matter in bar for a thing other than that of which the action is conceived, and to traverse that of which the action is conceived is not good pleading, as in Trespass committed in Middlesex, the defendant pleaded (dit) that the trespass was committed in London, and they put themselves in arbitration (abittrement), etc., denying that he (defendant) was guilty in Middlesex, this is no plea, etc.
Littleton JCP: such plea is good, and Sir, in such a case he (defendant) cannot plead (dire) that he received the money (deniers) in Cornwall, and made account for them before this same plaintiff, etc., denying that he received them in London, and Sir, if it were thus in fact that the receipt was at C. (Cornwall) and that the plaintiff had released to the defendant all actions of Account for receipt in Cornwall, etc., in this case he ought to plead the matter 'as above', denying that he received them at London, etc.
Sjt Jenney (for P?): in Trespass for goods taken (emportes) in Middlesex, is this a good plea for the defendant to plead (adire) that the plaintiff gave them (goods) to him (defendant) in Essex, and there he took them, denying that he (defendant) took them in Middlesex(?), this traverse is void
Littleton JCP and others: there they could take (the goods) in any county
Moyle JCP: this has been adjudged good in bar of Account to plead (adire) that the plaintiff himself had released all the advantage and profit that he (plaintiff) could have by the account, etc. |
Supposition
Receipt
Render
Rendering Account
Count
Delivery
Denial
Sans Ceo
Receiver
Manner
Form
Plea
No Plea
Contract
County
Pleading
Abatement
Statute
Intent (entende)
Appearance
Previously (devant ses heures)
Usage (use)
Examination
Making Examination
Case
Parcel
Issue
Parcel Of Issue
Action
Trespass
Battery
Trespass For Battery
Justification
Guilt (culpable)
Continuation
Payment
Money (les deniers)
Allegation
Taking Denial (prender sans ceo)
Seeming
Good Plea
Traverse
Bar
Bar Of Action
In Bar
Debt
Action Of Debt
Debt On A Contract
Condition
On Condition
Performance
Judgment
Jury
Misleading (enveigle)
Inveigling
Inquiry
Thing (chose)
Certainty
Putting (mis)
Sight (Vide)
Year
Detinue
Ad Idem
Admission (conust)
Confession
Acknowledgement
Nature
Same Nature
Nature Of Trespass
Day
Mischief
Party
Not Guilty
Rien Culpable
Finding
Truth (verum)
Oath (sacram-)
Verum Sacram-)
Sacred Truth
Holy Truth
Cestassavoir
Beating (batist)
Putting In Issue
In Issue
Attaint
Laying (gist)
Verdict
Driving (chace)
Outside Of The County
Good Issue
Otherwise
New Action
Recovery
Presumption (entende)
Twice Charged
Charge
Close
Breaking Close
Tree
Felling Trees
Growing (cressants)
Growth
Elsewhere (aillours)
Declaration
Bailment
Directness (immediate)
Direct Account
Proof
Performance Of Condition
Manner
Allegation
Discharge
Discharge Of Account
Goods
Delimitation (limitte)
Day Limited
Cause
Refusal
Death (mort)
Matter
Ut Supra
Every Time
Time
Cause Of Action
Confession
Accountable
Conditionally
Conception
Conception Of Action
Matter In Bar
Good Pleading
Arbitration (abittrement)
Release
Carrying Off (emportes)
Voidance
Void Traverse
Hand (mains)
Amount
Fullness (pleinment)
Fully Accounted
Adjudging
Advantage
Profit |
|
