Craig v Byrne

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 15 November 1843
• Date: 15 November 1843
• Court: Exchequer of Pleas (Ireland)

Exch. of Pleas.

CRAIG

and

BYRNE.

Stone v. Bliss Bulst. 43.

Hinton v. RoffeyENR 3 Mod. 35.

Hill v. Montagu 2 M. & Sel. 378.

Jƒ€™Anson v. StuartENR 1 T. R. 748.

Barker v. ThoroldENR 1 Wms. Saund. 47.

Aglionby v. TowersonENR T. Raym. 399.

Peytoeƒ€™s case 9 Co. 80.

Andrews v. WhiteheadENR 13 East, 102.

Thurman v. Wild 11 A. & E. 453.

Bro. Abr. Bro. Abr. Tit. Traverse, 179; 4 H. 7-9.

M. T.1843. Exch. of Pleas. DOE V. EJECTOR. 500 CASES AT LAW. in point-there, the tenant in possession having absconded, leaving the key of the house for which the ejectment was brought, in the hands of a house-broker, in order that he might let the house; the lessor of plaintiff served a declaration in ejectment on the clerk of the house-broker, at his Office, and affixed a copy on the door of the premises; the rule for judgÂment was made absolute in the first instance. Per Curiam. On the authority of the last case you are entitled to your order. It is Ordered by the Court, that service of said ejectment already had on Margaret Dunn, be deemed good service of said ejectÂment on Luke Byrne, a tenant in possession of, or who claims some right, title or interest, in the premises in said. ejectment mentioned, without further motion, serving this Order on said Margaret Dunn, and posting a copy thereof on the entrance gate of said premises. CRAIG v. BYRNE. Nov. 7, 18. . ass Tres TRESPASS quare clans= fregit. The first count of the declaration was Tsp Plea, that af- for breaking and entering plaintiff's close and prostrating'a party wall, ter the com- &c. The second count was for an asportavit. mating of the trespass, and The defendant's third plea was as follows :-Actio non ; " Because, before the ex hibiting of the " he says, that after the committing of the said several trespasses in said bill, it was " declaration mentioned, and before the exhibiting of the bill of the agreed be- tween plaintiff "plaintiff against him, the defendant, in this behalf, to wit, on the first and defendant, latter the " day of October, in the year of our Lord 1841, to wit, at," &c., "it that should do and " was agreed by and between the plaintiff and the defendant, that the perform cer tain work " defendant should do and perform certain work which was then agreed which was " upon, and find and furnish materials for the same for the plaintiff, in then agreed upon, and fur nish materials for the same, for the plaintiff, in satisaction and discharge of the trespass. Averment, that in pursuance of the agreement, the defendant did and performed the work, and found and provided materials for the same for the plaintiff, and that the plainÂtiff accepted and received such work and materials in full satisfaction and discharge of the trespass. Demurrer, upon the grounds that neither the nature of the agreement, nor particulars of the work performed had been stated with sufficient certainty. Held, that the plea was good; first, because the statement of the agreement was immaterial, and could not have been traversed by the plaintiff; and secondly, that a statement of the particulars of the work would have been objectionable, as falling within the rule pro• hibiting the introduction into pleadings of matters of evidence. CASES AT LAW. 601 44 full satisfaction and discharge of the said trespasses in the said declaration 44 mentioned, and of all damages by the plaintiff sustained by reason of 44 the committing thereof. And the defendant avers, that in pursuance "of said agreement, he, the defendant, did, at the plaintiff's request, "from time to time, after the making of the said agreement, and before "the exhibiting of the bill of the plaintiff, against him the defendant, 4, in...