Harrington v Coxe

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 25 April 1853
• Date: 25 April 1853
• Court: Queen's Bench Division (Ireland)

Queen's Bench

HARRINGTON

and

COXE.

Rigley and another v. Birch 4 Ir. Law Rep. 14.

Stratton v. Codd 9 Ir. Law Rep. 1.

Tilby v. BestENR 16 East, 163.

COMMON LAW REPORTS. 87 that the 31st section did not apply to ejectments, the indorsements II. T. 1854. therein directed being applicable only to those required by the 11th Queen's Bench VA PIDELEITB, and 12th sections, which did not apply to ejectment causes. v. SMITH. GREENE, B. I think the 31st section applicable to ejectments, and that I have no power to grant the application, as I take that section to be mandatory, in consequence of the alternative provision disÂÂabling the plaintiff from entering a parliamentary appearance, unless the provisions of the section be pursued. HARRINGTON v. COXE. E. T. 1853. April 25. MIATION, on behalf of the plaintiff in this case, applied for liberty to issue execution on foot of a judgment of Hilary Term 1853. The affidavit on which he moved stated that the plaintiff had obtained a judgment in Hilary Term against the defendant, for the penal sum of 200, and that same was had upon a certain writing obligatory, dated 13th December 1850, whereby the deÂÂfendant became bound in the said sum, but under a condition annexed, that if the defendant or his heirs, executors, &c., would well and truly pay,cause to be paid to the deponent, executors, &c., the sum of 100 with interest, at the time Or attorney, in the manner set forth in the defeazance, in a certain warrant of attorney thereto annexed, without fraud or further delay, then the obligation to be void, otherwise to remain in full force. The affidavit further stated that the warrant of attorney therein men- tioned, of even date therewith, authorised E. D. and T. M., attorneys, or any other attorney, to confess judgment against the defendant at suit of plaintiff, in or as of Michaelmas Term, or any Term sub- sequent to the date thereof, in any of Her Majesty's Courts of Record at Dublin, and that the time and manner of payment of bond, 88 COMMON LAW REPORTS. E. T. 1853. said 100 in the defeazance in said warrant, and previous to the Queen's Bench execution of the bond and warrant agreed on, were as follows, viz:- HARRINGTON v. the said principal stun of 100 should be paid by instalments ; COX& the sum of 10 on the 29th of December next following the date of the bond, and a like sum of 10 on the 29th of each succeeding four calendar months, from the said 29th December 1850, until the said 100 were paid off; and...