Harty v Davis

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 15 January 1850
• Date: 15 January 1850
• Court: Court of Common Pleas (Ireland)

Common Pleas.

HARTY

and

DAVIS.

Brady v. Fitzgibbon 1 J. & S. 503.

Morrogh v. Power 5 Ir. Law Rep. 494.

Kemmis v. acklin 11 Ir. Law Rep. 372.

Incorporated Society v. Richards 1 D. & W. 258.

Trulock v. obyENR 12 Sim. 402.

Christon v. BrophyUNK 10 Ir. Eq. Rep. 139.

Rawson v. Moore 2 J. & S. 601.

Latouche v. Oƒ€™BrienUNK 10 Ir. Eq. Rep. 113.

CASES AT LAW. 23 H. T. 1850. COmmonPleas. HARTY v. DAVIS. Jan. 15. SCIRE FACIAS, at the suit of the plaintiff as assignee of the conusee, To a scire fa alas, issued in to revive a judgment obtained by one Mary Davis, as of Hilary 1849 to revive Term 2 G. 4, against the defendant, for the sum of £600. a judgment ob- tamed in 1821, Second Plea.--And for a further .plea in this behalf the said the defendant having pleaded defendant, by leave of the Court, &c., says that the said Dame the Statute of Limitations Elizabeth Harty ought not to have execution for the debt and (3 8' 4 W. c.27) the plain damages, in the said writ of scire facias mentioned, against him the tiff replied an acknowledg said defendant, because he says that the present action or suit of ment in writ ing, given by scire facias was commenced and brought after the 7th day of March, the defendant, dated the 3rd in the year of our Lord 1841, to wit upon the 26th day of January of July 1848, more than in the year of our Lord 1849. And the said defendant further saith twenty years after the rendi that a present right to receive the moneys secured by the said judg- tion of the judgment. ment in the said writ of scire facias mentioned, accrued to the said Held, on de- murrer, that Mary Davis more than twenty years before the commencement of the an ac, ledgment in said action or suit of scire facias, to wit upon the 1st day of January writing within in the year of our Lord 1821, to wit at Dublin, in the county of - the 4th sec 3 & 4 W. 4, the city of Dublin. And the said defendant further says that at the itin t said time, when the said right to receive the money secured by the a w. 27' given yeahrs before wenty said judgment and soforth so accrued to the said Mary Davis as the commen ce ment of the aforesaid, to wit at the place aforesaid, she the said Mary Davis action, though more than was, and from thence until the assignment of the said judgment to twenty years after the ren the said Dame Elizabeth Harty continued to be, a person capable of dition of the judgment, was giving a discharge for and a release of the same at Dublin in the sufficient to keep the judg county aforesaid, and from the making of the said assignment ment alive as against the hitherto the said Dame Elizabeth Harty was then a person capable conusor. The words " in the of giving a like discharge for and a release of the same. And the meantime," which occur in said defendant further says that no part of the principal moue the 40th sec- tion of the secured by the said judgment, or any interest thereon, was paid at 3 & 4 W. 4, c. 27, refer to a period intermediate between the time when " the present right" has accrued and the commencement of the action or suit. 24 CASES AT LAW. any time within twenty years next after...