Page images
PDF
EPUB

dence. Thunder v. Warren, 8 Ir. L. Rep. 181, Ex. during the term, as suspending the rent altogether,

In an action for use and occupation, the plaintiff unless the fact of eviction bas been found by the proved by a witness the fact of the occupation by jury. Smyth v. Kellett, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 43. Q. B. the defendant, and on his cross-examination admitted there was a written agreement in existence

Action for Money had and received.).—A. being which the plaintiff did not produce. Held, that seized of government stock, standing in his name such instrument ought to have been given in evi- died intestate ; and B. obtained administration to dence; and a declaration, by the defendant, of his him; B. died intestate, and C. obtained alongi holding at a particular rent. was not admissible. nistration, de bonis non, to A.; C. executed a Lawless v. Queale, 8 Ir. L. Rep. 382, Q. B.

power of attorney, authorising E. to sell out the A. being in possession of certain premises, at a stock, and receive the amount for her, which yearly rent, proposed by letter to B. to become did ; C. afterwards died without having received lessee of the same, and additional premises, for the the proceeds of the sale, and appointed D. her same term that B. held, at a specified rent pay- executor; D. may recover the amount of the proable half yearly, to commence on the 1st of May ceeds, in an action for money bad and received by then next-reserving power to pay the ground rent | G., to the use of C. Curbois v. Bereton, 2 Jon. 397. to the landlord, and deduct the same from the sti Pleadings in indebitatus Assumpsit.] The de pulated rent; and, also, reserving liberty to pur-claration stated, that the defendant was indebted chase the right of B., in said premises, at any time to the plaintiff, in a certain sum, for the use and after the date thereof; A. having remained in pos- occupation of certain premises, without stating session for two years subsequent to this proposal, promise to pay it. It also contained the money and no lease having been executed— Held, that an counts, which were introduced under a " shereas action for use and occupation was properly main- also," and concluded with an averment, that the tainable for the rent in arrear. Henry v. Vance, defendant, in consideration of the premises re. 8 Ir. L. Rep. 205, Q. B.

spectively, promised to pay the said last mentioned When a corporation purchased houses, pursuant several monies respectively on request. Held, to power given then by certain town improvenient demurrer, that there were two counts in the declaActs of Parliament, which did not directly autho- ration, and that the first was bad, for want of rise a letting by will from year to year, and which promise; the word “last mentioned;" in the serund houses, at the time of the purchase, were in pos- count not extending to the first. Wilson v. Mitchell session of yearly tenants, whose interests had not '3 Ir. L. Rep. 538, Ex. been purchased, nor had they been remunerated A count for use and occupation, averring, for damages done by the works of the corporation « that the defendant held, and occupied at the -Held, that the corporation might sue them in request, and by the permission of the plaintifuse and occupation, for rent accruing after the Held, on special demarrer, to be bad. Colhoun v. purchase. The Corporation of Belfast v. Tisdall, Fox, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 369, Q. B. i Ir. Jur. 206, Cir. C. [Per Pigot, c. B.]

The declaration stated, that the defendant was The defendant was declared tenant under the indebted to J. C. deceased, in a certain sum for court in a mortgage matter. In the inonth of De- work and labour; and in another sum for goods cember, 1846, on the receiver being discharged, sold by the said J. C.; and in another sum for the plaintiff, (the mortgagor,) distrained the de. agisting divers cattle, without averring any promise fendant for the rent, which the latter paid under to pay. It also contained the money counts, wbiek pressure of the distress. In the month of March commenced thus—“ And, also, the said defendant, following the plaintiff put the defendant out of on the same day and year, and at the place aforepossession by an injunction, and brought an action said, was indebted,” &c.; and concluded—" And, for use and occupation, for the period intervening, therefore, the defendant afterwards, to wit on the between the preceding November, and the time of day and year last aforesaid, and at the place aforeexecuting the injunction. Held, that such an action said, in consideration of the premises

, then and was maintable. Mitchell v. Bulfin, l Ir. Jur. 143, Ex. there promised to pay the said last mentioned

At the period of the setting, the following me- several monies respectively, to the said J. C. in his morandum was entered—“Declare Edward Bulfin life time, on request ; yet he hath disregarded his tenant to the lands, at £66 per annum, he paying promises, and hath not paid any of the said monies, the inheritor for his seed and labour, and getting or any part thereof." Held, on special demurrer, in return compensation for the grass which has the first set of counts were bad for want of a probeen consumed.” Held, to be conclusive of the mise. Condon v. Ryves, 7 Ir. L. Rep. 399, Q. B. nature of the agreement, and that plaintiff could not sustain a count for the price and value of crops Pleadings in special Assumpsit.] —The declarabargained and sold. Ib.

tion in the first count averred, that certain actions Semble, that an action for use and occupation had been commenced by one B.

, as trustee of the of an incorporeal hereditament does not lie, except plaintiff, against C. and S., for certaia suns due it be incident to the reality. Minhear v. O'Leary, by them to B.; that judgment was recovered 1 Ir. L. Rep. 73, Q. B.

against them, and C. and s. taken in execution ; A tenant sued in an action for use and occupation, that in consideration thereof, and that the plaintiff, and who obtains a verdict which is bad, by reason at the request of the defendant

, would consent to of the misdirection of the judge who tried the case the discharge of the said C. and S. out of custody, --cannot, as cause against a motion for a new trial, on their paying the sums respectively due by then, rely upon the wrongful eviction by his landlord, and half the costs, the defendarx undertook to

y to the plaintiff the other half of the costs ; it no default was alleged on the part of H. A., and en averred the consent of the plaintiff to their no request averred on the part of the plaintiff. scharge, ou paying the amount of said sums, and Held, also, that the defect was not cured by the If the costs; that the other half of the said costs verdict, a previous request being necessary to give pre to be paid by the defendant on request, and title to the plaintiff, such request being laid in the en stated the breach. The third count was declaration as part of the defendant's promise. ried, averring, that the defendant promised to Maher v. O'Shea, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 516, Ex. Ch. answerable to the plaintiff for half the costs, in In an action of assumpsit the plaintiff declared nsideration that the plaintiff would consent to that he was seized under an indenture of release, rmit the sheriff to discharge them. Held, on of certain premises by which he covenanted to pay murrer, that these counts were bad, there being the rent thereby reserved, and also to keep the averment that the costs remained due and un premises in repair ; and being so seized, and having id, the defendant not being previously liable. in his possession such indenture, the defendant, in Held, also, that the consent stated in the first consideration that the plaintiff would deliver him iunt, should be a consent from the plaintiff in the the indenture, and put him in possession of the secution, and that it should be averred that such premises, promised to pay the rent, and keep the insent continued to the bringing of the action. premises in repair. Plea, that this promise was The second count stated, that the defendant pro parcel of a contract, respecting an interest in land, ised to pay half the costs, without stating to was within the Statute of Frauds, and required a hom. Held to be bad for want of that averment. note in writing. Held, upon general demurrer to lakeney v. Ware, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 246, Q. B. this plea, that it appeared sufficiently on the pleadThe statement that one person is trustee for ing, that the agreement concerned an interest in nother is not sufficient; the nature of the trust land, to bring it within the Statute of Frauds. hould be shewn. Ib. [Per Burton, J.] Bentham v. Hardy, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 179, Q. B. In a declaration in assumpsit there were three A declaration stated, that in consideration that pecial counts on bills of exchange. The first the plaintiff, and one E. B., now deceased, at the gainst the defendant as acceptor ; the second and special instance and request of the defendant, had wird as drawer of two other bills ; and the com given and made to the defendant a proposal of £15 on money counts. The first count contained the a year, with a fine for certain lands, undertook, sual promise to pay, according to the tenor, &c.; and promised the plaintiff, and the said. E. B. o promise was stated in either the second or third ; to complete a purchase of the estate, and to exend the general conclusion contained the words cute a lease of the premises; and averred, as a last mentioned." Held, on special demurrer, to breach, that the defendant did not effect and comhe second and third counts, that the general pro plete the purchase of the estate, nor execute a nise, in the conclusion, extended to these counts, lease of the premises. Special demurrer, that there lotwithstanding the words last mentioned. Mills v. was no averment of a performance of precedent Bamfield, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 323, Q. B. (See Lomax v. matter by the plaintiff, or of a special request by Vilson, 3. C. B. 763.]

the plaintiff to the defendant to execute the lease ; In an action by the holder, against the indorser, and that there was no averment of a reasonable i is not necessary to aver a promise, in each time having elapsed, or that a conveyance had been ount, the promise in the conclusion, given by the tendered by the plaintiff to be executed. Held jeneral rules of 1834, extending to all. Roche v. that the declaration was bad. Dolan v. M Ternan, Hodges, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 178, C. P.

9 Ir. L. Rep. 175, Q. B. Held, also, that the averment, “ promised to pay A declaration stated, that in consideration that he said several monies to the plaintiff," was tanta- the plaintiff, at the request of the defendant, had nount to a “promise to the plaintiff to pay him," then and there bought a horse of him, he then and

there promised that the horse was sound. Held, The declaration stated, that one H. A. was on special demurrer, to be good ; for that the sale adebted to the plaintiff in £100 as his salary, for and warranty were contemporaneous, and that the rork done by the plaintiff for the said H. A., in statement in the declaration was not an averment lis trade of corn-factor ; and that H. A. assigned of a sale being bad before the promise was made. o the defendant his business, and the good will of Smyth v. Morrison, 10 Ir. L. Rep. 213, Q. B. h and all debts due to him; and that defendant, Í he declaration contained a count in assumpsit 11 cousideration of plaintiff agreeing to assist himn by payee against the defendant, as one of three n carrying on said business, and collecting said joint and several makers of a promissory note for lebts, promised to hold himself accountable for £24, and the money counts. "Pleas, the general he payment of plaintiff's salary, due by H. A. to issue to the whole declaration, and to the second he plaintiff; and in consideration of the promises, count, actio non ; because before the making of the lefendant undertook, and promised to pay, the note in the first count mentioned, the defendant iaid last-mentioned sum of money, to the plaintiff

, was indebted to the plaintiff in £20, and thereupon, on request. The common money counts were added, in consideration that the defendant, at the special stating a general breach, but without averring a instance and request of the plaintiff

, could procure licet sæpius requisitur. Held upon writ of Error, one P. R. and J. M., to join the defendant in making after verdict al.d judgment for the plaintiff, that the said note, the plaintiff promised and underthe declaration was bad ; it appearing that the took not to take any proceedings by city attachdefendant's pre mise was a promise to pay the debt ..ent, or otherwise, for the recovery of said sum of of another person, H. A., upon request; yet that ' £20, until default should be inade in the payment

IC. Ib.

of the said note; and that the defendant did pro- said E. F. and the company, setting forth, &c. (sen. cure the said P. R. and J. M. to join in making ting forth and qualifying certain of the items con the said note; and the same was made upon the tained in the declaration, with respect to his age terms and the consideration aforesaid, and upon health, habits, and his accession to the articles of no other; and that afterwards, and before the note agreement, and constitution of the company, and became due, the plaintiff, in violation of said agree- omitting the others,) and the policy coneluded with ment, and of the terms and consideration upon a proviso that in case any untrue or frauduleet which the note was made, sued out of the Court of allegation be contained in said declaration deposited Record, of the borongh of Dublin, a certain writ, in the office as aforesaid, or that any information called a city attachment, and procured the de respecting the past health or habits of the party fendant's goods and chattels to be seized and assured, or any other circumstance important for attached ; and afterwards prosecuted an action in the directors to know shall have been withheld from said court, against the defendant, for the said sum them, or in case payment of the said premiums shall of £20, in violation of the agreement and the not be regularly made as aforesaid, or ifthe interest terins, and consideration upon which said note was on the part of the assured in the life shall cease and made. On the first plea the plaintiff joined issue, determine, or in case any of the pullities specified and to the special plea replied--that the promis- | in the conditions hereunto annexed, as well as in the sory note, in the said plea mentioned, was not original proposal, then and in every such ease this made upon the terms and consideration in said policy shall be null and void, and all monies paid plea alleged. The jury found for the defendant therefor shall be forfeited to the company. The upon the special plea, and, by the direction of the plaintiffs averred in their pleadings that the deels

. court, for the plaintiff upon the general issue, on ration of the said E. F. so referred to in the polier the first count, and for the defendant on the issue and so made by him, was in all respects true. Heli on the indebitatus counts, which were not sustained that all the matters contained in the proposal and by the evidence. Held that the special plea was a declaration referred to in the policy, besides these valid one, and that the finding of the jury there- specially set forth, were to be taken as matters of upon having shewn a total failure of consideration, warranty and not of mere representation, and that the defendant was entitled to a general verdict therefore the suppression by E. F. of the fact of his upon the record. Pepper v. Maguire, 10 Ir. L. having been attended by another medical man be Rep. 461, Ex.

sides ihe one named in the declaration, although not A declaration in assumpsit by the indorsee one of those matters specially set forth in the policey

, against the acceptor, which contained a special had vitiated the policy, though the jury found that count, with the usual promise to pay in it; and the the fact suppressed was neither fraudulently withcommon money counts concluded with an aver- held, nor a circumstance important for the directors ment, that the defendant afterwards, &c., in con- of the company to know. Scales v. Scanlan, 6 Ir. sideration of the promises respectively, then and L. Rep. 367, Éx. Ch. there promised the plaintiff to pay the last men Overruling the judgment of the court below, (5 tioned monies respectively, on request ; yet be Ir. L. Rep. 139, Ex.) Brady, C. B, Richards

, B, hath disregarded his promise, and hath not paid and Perrin, J. dissentientibus. any of the said monies, or any part thereof, to the Assumpsit on three several policies of assurance, plaintiff's damage, &c. Held, to be a sufficient each contained a provision that it should be void averment of a breach of the promise contained in " if anything stated by the assured, either in the the special count. Bourke v. Cooney, 6 Ir. L. declaration thereinbefore mentioned to have been Rep., C. P.

made by him should not be true.” The proposal Evidence.]—On a sale by auction of certain " Has the party's life been accepted or refused at

for assurance contained the following particular: property of a bankrupt, the conditions of sale re- any other office, and, if accepted, was it at the usual ferred to public advertisements, which professed to premium, or with what addition?" The answer contaiu a description of the property to be sold. returned by the assured was, “ Asylum and National Held, in an action of assumpsit, by the vendee Office, at the usual premium.” The following agreeagainst the assignee of the bankrupt, to recover ment appeared at the foot of the proposal

, and was back the deposit on the purchase money, that these signed by the assured: “I bereby agree that the advertisements were admissible to show that the proposal mentioned in the above policy shall form conditions of sale misdescribed the premises. the basis of the contract between the assured apd Thompson

v. Guy, 7 Ir. L. Rep. 6, Q. B. [Pen- the company; and if there be any fraudulent connefather, C. J., dissentiente.]

cealment or untrue allegation contained therein, all money which shall have been paid on account of

this insurance shall become forfeited, and the policy ASSURANCE, (POLICY or.)

void." The defendant proved at the trial that the Policies on Life.]— A policy of assurance effected assured had proposed the same party's life for insuron the life of E. F., commenced with a recital that ance at two other offices, previous to effecting the E. F. had proposed to effect an assurance on his own assurance with the defendants, and his proposal was life with the C. J. company, and had deposited in rejected. The judge, in summing up, stated to the the office of the said company a declaration signed jury that it was for them to say whether there had by him, dated &c., which being set forth as the strict been a concealment by the assured of any circumstaternent of the facts, was received as the basis and stance which it was material for the company to condition of the contract of assurance between the know. Held, that this was a misdirection, for that

.

the assured had contracted with the company that sioned thereby, though the subpoena did not require the several matters contained in the proposal should him to attend "from day to day” until the cause was be answered truly, and, consequently, that the ques- disposed of, and though he was not served with a tion, whether an answer given was more or less ma- further notice to attend. Swanne v. Taafe, 8 Ir. terial, was not open to him. Bennett V. Anderson, L. Rep. 101, C. P. 1 Ir. Jur. 245, Q. B.

It is not necessary that a subpæna should be enPolicies on Vessels.] – A policy of assurance ef

titled in the name of inore than one of the lessors

of the plaintiff. Ib. fected on a vessel contained the words “lost or not lost at Cardiff to Ballyshannon, beginning the adven

Where a question was left to the jury whether a ture from loading thereof at Cardiff,” and in a sub. particular witness was not collusively kept out of the sequent part of the policy were the words, that way, Held, that the subpoena being to attend on a the said vessel was warranted safe in port.” Held particular day ouly, was no defence, though it might ther the words “safe in port” meant the port of BI. D. & o. 159, N. P. [Per Pigot, C. B.] departure, and that the vessel being at the time of Bl. D.& O. 159, N. P. [Per Pigot, C. B.] effecting the policy safe in another port, did not For non-payment of Costs.]-Where a motion to satisfy the terms of the policy, Kernahan v. The take a frivolous demurrer off the file was granted, National Assurance Company. 10 Ir. L. Rep. 319. and the parties filing it ordered to pay costs, Held,

Q. B.

that an attachment might issue for them, as they Substitution of service upon Insurance Compa- costs in the cause. Anonymous, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 66,

could not be included in the execution, not being nies.]—See PRACTICE AT LAW, (SUBSTITUTION OF

Q. B. SERVICE.)

Practice.] -A conditional order for an attach

ment for the use of insulting expressions having · ATTACHMENT.

been made ; on cause being shown, the court, Against Sheriff]-See SHERIFF.

under the circumstances, ordered the cause shown

to be disallowed, and the conditional order to be For contempt of process of Court.) - To obtain made absolute, but the attachment not to issue. an attachment for not obeying a writ of habeas corpus if the writ be not personally served, the alli. Sturgeon v. Douglass, 10 Ir. L. Rep. 128, Q. B. davit must state that a servant or agent of the party For non-performance of award.]-See ARBITRAto whom the writ is directed was served at the tor. house where the person was detained. In re Wildridge, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 1, Q. B. Where an attorney had been subpæned to give

ATTESTATION-See WARRANT OF evidence and excused his absence, on the ground

ATTORNEY. that he was attending a motion in the Rolls Court, and denied the contempt, the Court refused an at ATTORNEY AND SOLICITOR-See tachment at the instance of the plaintiff against WARRANT OF ATTORNEY. Costs. whom there had been a verdict. Collins v Green,

Admission.]— The court, before permitting an 3 Ir. L. Rep. 17, Q. B.:

Where a wituess came from the country to Dub- attorney to be re admitted who had, at his own delin

, pursuant to a subpæna ad testificandum, and sire, been struck off the roll, required him to serve attended court during the first day of the sittings, but did not attend on the next day until after the to be re-instated. Anonymous, 10 Ir. L. Rep. 111,

Ex. case had been called on, and the plaintiff nonsuited, the court refused to grant an attachment against circumstances of the case, though he had not served

An attorney admitted as an apprentice under the the witness, it appearing that he had been induced

five

years. Ex parte Merville, 2 Jon. 282. to suppose from the state of the Nisi Prius list at the close of the first day, that the case could not

A minor will not be admitted an attorney of the come on at an early hour on the second; and the court. Ex parte Robinson, 2 Jon. 622. witness deposing that he had been unable to leave

The 1 & 2 Geo. 4, c. 48, applies only where the his bed until a later hour than usual on the latter party has been bound apprentice after he has taken day, in consequence of indisposition. M Cormack his degree. Ex parte Colville, 2 Jon. 624. 8. Magrath, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 519, Ex.

Privilege.]-In transitory actions, an attorney The court refused to attach a witness for not at has the privilege of suing in his own court, and tending a trial in obedience to a subpæna, where his laying and retaining the venue in the county in non-attendance originated in a misconception of which it is situated. Montgomery v. Cheyne, 2 Ir. the meaning of an arrangement entered into be. L. Rep. 163, Q. B. tween him and the plaintiff's attorney, whereby he In an action, by an attorney, for the recovery of was to be sent for. 1b.

a bill of costs, the venue was changed before plea A material witness who was served with a sub-pleaded to the adjoining county, upon an affidavit, pena ad testificandum on a certain day, and attended that from the peculiar influence of the plaintiff in accordingly, but on finding that the trial was ad- the county, where the venue was laid, a fair and journed until the following day, expressed an inten- impartial trial could not be had. Boyse v. Smyth, tion of absenting, and did absent himself, was at- 2. Ir. L. Rep. 366, Ex. tached until he paid the costs of the non-suit occa If an attorney be sued in autre droit by bill, no

Gould, 2 l

writ having been issued against him, bis proper contrary being shewn. Hamilton v. course is, to move to set aside those proceedings; L. Rep. 285, Q. B. if he appear and plead, or demur, he waives the Copies of an attorney's bill of costs are me objection. Kehoe v. Wright, 9 Ir. L. Rep. 261, Ex. allowed in the taxation of the costs of an eter Where an attorney is sued in autre droit by bill

, brought to recover the amount of that bil. Gere without process, the proceedings are irregular, and v. Donovan, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 333, Q. B. will be set aside with costs. Keely v. Lynch, 9 Ir. The court will not entertain a motion to tear L. Rep. 563, Ex.

taxation before the costs have been signed by the Where an attorney is sued as such jointly, with officer. Burke v. Ormsby, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 64, CP an unprivileged person, the declaration will be set Where an executrix of an attorney sued for a la aside for irregularity. Johnson v. Sparkes, 9 Ir. of costs due to her testator, the court stayed the me L. Rep. 139, C. P., S. C., Bl. D. & 0., 49. ceedings until the bill had been taxed

, but withosen The circumstance of the defendant having.com- the costs of the motion, though the defendant la pelled the plaintiff to give security for costs, is not served a consent to pay when the amount lovali a waiver of the irregularity

be ascertained. Rowland v. Bole, 3 Ir. l. liepa An attorney of the superior courts, on appeal, 183, C. P. can assert his privilege, as an objection to the juris

When the practice of the taxing officer in the diction of the Manor Court, though he appeared question to be decided, the court will not enter below by counsel and attorney. Molloy, appel. v. into it without the officer's report. Irwin v. Jos Caldbeck, resp. Bl. D. & 0.217. [Per Pigot, C.B.] dan, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 468, C. P."

A petition, praying that the respondent

, License- Certificate.]— The defendant, who was attorney, be ordered to tax his costs, and furnisk an attorney, but had not taken out his license list of credits, without alleging misconduct on the for several years, having been served with process, part of the respondent, in having refused the era appeared by attorney, and pleaded in abatement dits required, or an undertaking on the part of the his privilege to be sued by bill without process. petitioner to pay the amount of the costs when

The court refused a motion to set aside the plea. ascertained. Held to be irregular, and that the Fury v. Ryan, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 518, Ex.

respondent was entitled to the costs of the appli

. 56, which imposes a penalty on an attorney practis: cation. Roddy : Conroy, 4 kr. L. Rep

. 135, Č.P.

Where an action is bronght by an attorney for ing without having obtained bis annual certificate, the recovery of his bill of costs, and it appears does not apply to the case of an attorney practis that there is but one taxable item ; though it be ing in the Crown Court at Quarter Sessions. for business done in some other court of law, the Scott v. Frayne, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 41, Ex.

court will stay the proceedings, and refer the bill Bill of Costs.]-In an action for attorney's bill for taxation-upon an undertaking by the defend. of costs, if it appear from the bill itself that the ant's attorney, to pay same when taxed and ascer: defendant is the person intended to be charged, tained_independently of the 7 Geo. 2, c. 14, from the bill need not be drawn in the technical form of the inherent jurisdiction which the court exercises a debtor and creditor account. Holmes v. Magrath, over its own officers. Bastable v. Reardon, 4 lk 5 Ir. L. Rep. 376, Q. B.

L. Rep. 167, Q. B. An English solicitor suing, in this country a

Where an action was brought upon two bills of defendant resident here, for costs incurred in Eng- costs, as to one of which the defendant admitted land, is not bound to serve his bill of costs, pur. his liability. The court, upon his application, te suant to the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 73,* (Eng.) prior to ferred the undisputed bill for taxation, upon terans bringing his action. Whyte v. Chichester, 9 Ir. of his lodging with the officer a blank plea of conL. Rep. 409, Q. B.

fession, to be filled for the amount to which the An Irish solicitor suing in England for business said bill should tax, if the plaintiff should fail a done in Ireland, is not bound to serve his bill of to the disputed bill

, but if he recovered the amount costs one month before bringing the action. Guin- of it, that also, should be included in the plea di ness, v Allen, 9 Ir. L. Rep. 412, Q. B.

confession. Kelly v. Antisel, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 492, EL

When a bill of costs is pleaded as a set off the Taxable items.]-When a bill of costs was for court have discretion to order those costs to be conveyancing, with the exception of one item, for taxed, without the plaintiff giving an undertaking drawing a bond and warrant of attorney. Held, to pay the amount. Alker v. Dunne, 9 Ir. L. that the warrant being a taxable item subjected Rep. 105, Q. B. the whole bill to taxation, and no action could be The court has jurisdiction, independently of the brought on such a bill if not served pursuant to the 7 Geo. 2, c. 14, to give to a defendant the costs of statute. Dunne v. Tierney, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 321, Ex. taxation, though the reference to tax be not made

Taxation of.]-Where an attorney delivered his until after action brought. -v. Matsey, Bl. bill a month before action brought, and after D. & 0., 150, Ex. action brought, the client obtained an order to The court will not, on a motion by the defendhave the bill taxed, and more than one-sixth was ant for the costs of taxation, enquire whether the struck off. The court refused to give the client taxation be correct, their being no motion to review. the costs of taxation, no settled practice to the Ib.

Lienand Motions for liberty to proceed for costa

. This act has been extended to Ireland, 12 & 13 Vict. In an action of assault

, the plaintiff having obtained -- Editor.

a verdict with 40s, damages, and being indebted in

« EelmineJätka »