Baird and Moore, Appellants; Kirk, Respondent

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 28 March 1859
• Date: 28 March 1859
• Court: Circuit Court

Circuit Case

BAIRD and MOORE,

Appellants;

KIRK,

Respondent.

iv Appendix. 180. Circitit case. BAIRD and MOORE, Appellants; KIRK, Respondent.* March28. CIVIL-BILL EJECTMENT, for the recovery of a house near CarrickferÂÂgus. Decree by the Chairman of the Quarter Sessions4 and appeal therefrom. It appeared by the civil-bill that D. Logey, in July 1854, delivered possession of the premises in question to one Nancy Baird, as permissive occupant ; that the defendant W. Moore was then in possession of said premises ; that Nancy Baird lived out of the country, in Scotland ; that Logey's interest had become vested in the plaintiff, by whom possession had been demanded from the defendant W. Moore. This ejectment was not signed by the plaintiff's attorney, but had been filled up at his dictation, and signed by his clerk in his name, under his immediate inspection. It appeared from the evidence that the premises in question had been occupied for a great number of years by an old man called Logan ; that the defendant, Nancy Baird, had been his nurse and attendant up to the time of his death ; that upon Logan's death, Nancy Baird requested a gentleman called Dunne to ask Logey, the then owner, to allow her to remain on in the house ; that Logey consented so to do, and Logey's permission was communicated by Dunne to Nancy Baird. S. Ferguson, for the appellant, objected that the ejectment was not signed by the attorney, as required by the Civil-bill Act, 14 & 15 Vic., c. 57, s. 60 ; and referred to a case of Ifl'Auliffe v. Stock, decided by KEOGH, J., at the present Assizes in Leitrim, in which he held that an ejectment, signed by a person who had a general authority from the attorney to fill up and sign ejectments, did not comply with section 60. W. IIPCartney, contra, contended that the ejectment having been filled up at the attorney's dictation, and signed under his immediate inspection, in his name, was a sufficient compliance with the 14 & 15 Vic., c. 57, s. 60, and drew a distinction between that section and section 29 of 12 & 13 Vic., c. 53, by which the solicitor is required to sign the bill of costs with his proper hand. • Comm FITZGERALD, B. (Antrim Spring Assizes, 1859.) f 3. H. OTWAY, ti;q. Appendix. FITZGERALD, B. 1859. Although I consider it very desirable that these civil-bill...