Knaggs v Hunter
Jurisdiction | Ireland |
Judgment Date | 22 November 1849 |
Date | 22 November 1849 |
Court | Court of Common Pleas (Ireland) |
Common Pleas.
Stokes v. MasonENR 9 East, 424.
Lewis v. er 5 D. P. C. 327, 447.
Knox v. Irwin 6 Ir. Law Rep. 250.
Crossley v. Shaw 2 W. Bl. 1085.
Lane v. SaltmarshENR 2 Salk. 544.
Hand v. Grosvenor Bar. 424.
Paul v. GarryENR 6 B. & C. 77, n.
Gwynne v. Meredith 2 H. & B. 565.
20 CASES AT LAW. M. T. 1849. CommonPleas. KNAGGS v. HUNTER. (Common Pleas.) Nov. 22. A declaration commenced by stating that " E. H. H., one of the atÂÂtorneys, was summoned to answer T. K. of a plea that he render to the plaintiff the sum of 250, which he owes and unjustly deÂÂtains from him, and therefore the said T. K., by G. H. his attorney, comÂÂplains ;" and concluded, " wherefore the plaintiff saith that he is injured and hath sustained damage to the amount of 100, and therefore he brings his suit. Held, on speÂÂcial demurrer, that it did not sufficiently appear from the declaraÂÂtion that the defendant was a practising attorney, enÂÂtitled to the privilege of being sued by bill, or that he was an attorÂÂney of the Court of C. P. DECLARATION by plaintiff, the drawer, against the defendant as the acceptor of a bill of exchange, and upon the money counts. The declaration commenced as follows :-" Edward Hamilton " Hunter, one of the attorneys, was summoned to answer James "Knaggs, of a plea that he render to the said plaintiff the sum of "250, which he owes and unjustly detains from him, and therefore "the said James Knaggs, by Gustavus Heron, his attorney, comÂÂ" plains ;" and concluded-" Wherefore the plaintiff saith that he is "injured and hath sustained damage to the amount of 100, and "therefore he brings his suit." Special demurrer, assigning for cause that the declaration is a departure from the ordinary forms of pleading ; that although by the declaration it appears that the defendant is an attorney entitled to be sued according to the privileges of an attorney, yet that it appears from the declaration that the defendant is summoned as an ordinary person ; that it is not shown that the defendant was present in Court ; that the declaration improperly concluded by bringing suit in place of praying relief, and that the declaration was uncertain in not showing that the defendant was an attorney of the Court of Common Pleas. Joinder in demurrer. F. Meagher, in support of the demurrer. The defendant being an attorney should have been sued and not summoned : Tidd's Practice, 9th ed., pp. 81, 82. The statement that the defendant is an...
To continue reading
Request your trial