Kiernan v Brereton and Others

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date27 November 1866
Date27 November 1866
CourtExchequer (Ireland)

Exchequer.

KIERNAN
and
BRERETON and others.

Warren v. Cunningham Gow. N. P. 71.

Frowd v. StillardENR 4 C. & P. 51.

Brooks v. MasonENR 1 H. Bl. 290.

Holmes v. Magrath 5 Ir. Law Rep. 376.

Finchett v. HowENR 2 Camp. 275.

Lucas v. RobertsENR 11 Exch. 41.

Champ v. StokesENR 6 H. & N. 683.

Daubney v. Phipps 16 Q. B. 507, 514.

Manning v. Glynn 1 Jones, 513.

Gridley v. Austen 16 Q. B. 504.

Daubney v. Phipps 16 Q. B. 507, 514.

Champ v. StokesENR 6 H. & N. 683.

Manning v. Glynn 1 Jones, 513.

COMMON LAW REPORTS. 203 M. T. 1866. Exchequer. KIERNAN v. BRERETON and others.* ACTION for work and labour, and on money counts. The particuÂÂlars claimed 233. 3s. 11d., as the amount of three several bills of costs of plaintiff, as attorney and solicitor for Robert Laurence Brereton, William Watson Brereton, and Caroline Catherine Brereton. Robert Laurence Brereton pleaded separately. William Watson Brereton and Caroline C. Brereton pleaded together. Sixth plea to count for work and labour, that no such bill as required by statute 12 & 13 Vic., c. 53, was delivered by plaintiff to defendants W. W. Brereton and C. C. Brereton. The case was tried before Mr. Baron DEASY, in the Consolidated Nisi Prins Court, in Trinity Term. At the trial, a joint retainer of the plaintiff by all the defendants was proved for certain portions of the bills of costs ; that R. L. Brereton acted for the other two defendants, who resided out of the jurisdiction, under a power of attorney from them ; and that R. L. Brereton was personally served with the three bills of costs. The bills of costs were referred to as bills Nos. 1, 2, and 3. No. 1 was a bill of Chancery costs ; it was entitled in margin " Henry Wray Brereton, William Watson Brereton, Robert .LauÂÂ" rence Brereton, plaintiffs ; Felthern Watson, defendant ; William " Watson Brereton, Robert Laurence Brereton, Caroline Catherine "Brereton, petitioners ; Carroll Watson and, by suggestion, Thomas " Sadleir, respondents ;" and was headed " In Chancery: Miscel laneous costs in these causes between solicitor and client." The bill was signed "Francis Kiernan, 19 WestmOreland-street ;" citor and client," and directed to R. There were some items in the costs with which R alone was chargeable. Nov. 26, 27. A bill of costs, in order to comply with the statute 12 and 13 Vic., c. 53, s. 2, must clearly point out on the face of it, or by some writing connected with it, the party or parties to be charged. K., an at- torney, was jointly...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT