. Selections from Leake's Elements of the law of contracts and Finch's cases on contracts . , orof waiving the wrong and claimmg the proceeds of the wrong in thehands of the defendant as a debt, if the plaintiff chooses to enforcehis claim for damages, the defendant cannot plead his bankruptcy,because a demand of that nature is not provable, and, therefore, notdischarged by bankruptcy (c); but if the plaintiff frames his demandas a debt, the bankruptcy of the defendant is a good defence, becausesuch debt is provable {d). Whenever a claim is discharged by bank-ruptcy, all the right to special d
. Selections from Leake's Elements of the law of contracts and Finch's cases on contracts . , orof waiving the wrong and claimmg the proceeds of the wrong in thehands of the defendant as a debt, if the plaintiff chooses to enforcehis claim for damages, the defendant cannot plead his bankruptcy,because a demand of that nature is not provable, and, therefore, notdischarged by bankruptcy (c); but if the plaintiff frames his demandas a debt, the bankruptcy of the defendant is a good defence, becausesuch debt is provable {d). Whenever a claim is discharged by bank-ruptcy, all the right to special damage, being accessory to and conse-quential on the claim, is also barred (e). (a) ^x p. MendeU 1 De G. J. & S. Doug. 584; , 5 330-, 33 L. J. B. 14; Ex ,M (d) Johnson w. Spiller,! Bong. 16T; L J B 2L aiii see Woolley v. Smitfii 3 C. B» 610, (6) RoMnson\, Vale, 2 B. & C. 762. 618, 622. (c) Parker v. Norton, 6 T. R. 695; (e) VanSandauv*CorsbietZB,&Ald» per Buller, J., Utter son v. Vernon, 3 K. 539, 548; Goodtitle v. North, 2 *xi j/%A£y9-^. I/O J CHAPTER XIV, DISCHARGE OF I.—By Agreement,* LANGDEN v. STOKES,In the Kings Bench, Michaelmas Tebm, 1634. [Reported in Croke Charles, Assumpsit. Whereas the defendant, 2 Apr. 1633, (for such a valuable consideration) assumed to go such a voyage in such a ship n before August following; and alleges a breach in the non-performance. T The defendant pleaded, that before any breach the plaintiff, the ^ fourth of April, at such a place, exoneravit eum of the said promise. rs Hereupon the plaintiff demurred. And now Rolle for the plaintiff I alleged, that this pleading a discharge, without showing how, was not 1 good; and he cited divers books 22 Ed. IV. 40. Quod indemnem ^ conservet, or exonerabit, is no plea. But Maynard for the defendant ^ argued to the contrary, that for as much as this was an action grounded upon a promise by words, it may be discharged by words, before the brea
Size: 1976px × 1265px
Photo credit: © Reading Room 2020 / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1800, bookdecade1890, bookpublis, booksubjectcontracts
