Waldron v Parrott. Dawson. v Dawson

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 18 April 1859
• Date: 18 April 1859
• Court: Exchequer (Ireland)

Exchequer.

WALDRON

and

PARROTT.

DAWSON.

and

DAWSON.

Johnson v. DiamondENR 11 Exch. 431.

Legge v. Tucker 2 Eng. Jur., N. S., 1235.

Mangles v. Dixon 3 H. L. Cas. 702.

COMMON LAW REPORTS. 175 had obtained the Counsel's signature on his own undertaking. This H. T. 1859. was an agreement to receive the costs to the use of the Counsel, so, Exchequer. far as his fees were concerned. It is impossible not to feel that, in this HOBART V. case, Mr. Hobart has been very hardly treated, and we should natu BUTLER. rally feel anxious to assist him, if we could do so without a violation of the principles of law. But I cannot say, consistently with the authorities, that 25. 4s. of the 97 odd, which Mrs. Butler received out of Court, in payment of her demand and costs, was, in point of law, received by her to Mr. Hobart's use ; and am therefore reluctÂÂantly compelled to say that the verdict for the defendant was a proper one, and ought not to be disturbed. VALDRON v. PARROTT. SAME v. DAWSON. ON the 23rd of October 1858, the plaintiff Waldron, a judgment creditor of the defendant, obtained the usual garnishee order, calling upon the garnishees John S. Dawson, Jasper Dawson and Emerson Dawson, to show cause why they should not, out of the sum of 32. is. Od. due by them to the defendant, pay to the plaintiff the sum of 31. 10s. Od., for principal, and two shillings Jor interest, being the amount of the judgment in this cause. On the 4th of November an affidavit was filed on behalf of the garnishees, by a Mr. John Farrell, from which it appeared that the defendant Parrott was an engineer, and had been employed by the Messrs. Dawson, the garnishees, to measure weekly certain buildings which were in process of erection for them. Mr. Farrell further stated that the rate of remuneration agreed upon was 22 per cent., and that there was due to the defendant, upon that assumption, a sum of liberty to issue the writ reserve 176 COMMON LAW REPORTS. E. T. 1859. 15. 10s. Od., which had been offered to the plaintiff. The de Exchequer; fendant, however, alleged that the rate of remuneration was to be WALDRON v. 5 per cent. rARROTT. On the 10th of November 1858, an order was made, under the 66th section of the Common Law Procedure Act 1856, " That " the plaintiff in this cause be at liberty to proceed against the said " John S. Dawson, Jasper Dawson and Emerson Dawson, by writ, "calling upon them to show cause why there should not be execution " against them for the said...