The Sun.
London, England, 1829-11-14 00:00:00

VICF-CHANCELLOR'S COURT•

HOBBAIID GLOYER.—MNJUNCTION• rso
Mr. KNIGHT applied upon motion in this case' ve
injuncfon to restrain the defendant from endorsing °I. the
gociatiog any bills, or otherwise using the name ° The
partnership, of which he had lately been a member.
itb
original bill was filed by two persons, who togetber;ol,
the defendant, had been partners in a cotton-mill, in the
tinghamshire. The defendant was originally clerk t°,iog
firm, but had since been admitted as a pirty.er, en?r6)liiit
two-fifths of the profits. The agreement of partiteth
provided, that if the undertaking proved unprofitabl',
parties might put an end to it npon notice. c°ll,,
had turned out good fur nothing, notice bad been gwolj,
the defendant for a dissolution, the machinery had beetjd of
and the whole substance of the partership diar9‘„l,ol
All this the defendant admitted, but insisted that ti'rr,"biPt
been no dissolution. At the cessation of the partu,,eool.;
the funds in the hands of the bankers amounted t°''tl the
the defendant had drawn a cheque for 321., vibledifeJt
bankers were compelled to pay in consequence of :,:lob°
of an action in ease they did not. The defendali
threatened that he would draw hills in the voilt
e' ctit#
name, for the purpose of raising

granted.
BROWN v. CLAXTON.
004
The Court r, as occupied the greater part of the
with arguments iu this part heard chse, at the conclwor
of which hie Honour promised to give judgment '
day morning..

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
nowroN v. WILLIS.
CO°
This was an action by an Attorney, to recover his
of the defendant for conducting his Chanter), suit, toi
before Lord Tenterden at the last sittings in this Owe,
a verdict returned fur the plaintiff. The defendanto„l
fended in per,on, and contended that the attorneyOs
henefitted the cause by his exertions, hut lo e
had, in fact, injured it by neglect. lie attempted fhe
through the whole Chancery suit, item by iteM• bora
Learned Judge, however, baying for a long time
him with great patience, was at last obliged to preel jes'
reading more than was relevent to the cause. frlied.efu,
dant now moved the full Court for a rule to shale aB-; eD
a new trial, on the ground that the Learned Judge,' ° ses4
trial had rejected documentary evidence, whi7.o vhe
of great importance to the cause, and that he bati'-h
directed the Jury.—The defendant went tlitcalg,,liicljj
Chancery suit again, and also read the d
he referred. He complained that the attorney bat cool',
for affidavits which were not made use°,c,afinbaye..ittli}t:col:o,,,gliti:
in making his motion, and that the attorney ba",j,
plied him with copies of affidavits which were o't" gsvii
After again hearing him patiently, the Coottil'c°,ol
ehr.
judgment, observing that if an attorney had neg,,eola c,ja
client so as to betray his interests, that neglect got
tainly be a bar to his recovering his costs', blot.
case it did not appear that there bad been ''ecs,,j it, the
to the complaint of the affidavits not bring o'
peared by the evidence on the trial that 110 tile.
ojections contained in the affidavits were
void retatio
souse of the observations impertinent. it ".°„
therefore in the discretion of the Counsel ei:"°•litipo,
brief, to refrain from injuring the cause of
enforcing what would appear to him fatder,:,„/,sel, -
The affidavits were prepared and laid before
must of course be paid for.—Role refused.

t
PREROGATIVE COURT' 1 gob
In the case of the goods of John Brett, "et;;eej to the
broker, of Lancashire, Dr. Lusnutcrroti aVP" t ree "
into full I°,,J Si°
Court to have its sanction for carrying
will left by the deceased. The Learned
the deceased had died possessed of considerable rioss
Doctor so_,lertfj",
which he had willed to his wife and children, bilted efCero
consequence 'of each sheet of the will being gr.op
the last, it became necessary to have the 804'11
Court to carry the same into effect.
The COURT granted the application.

0
NICLIOLD V. DANES.
In this case the KING'S ADVOCATE ai)peare4,l,9oer:
into the Court an obligation with a view t 0
letijoti:fr
will granted to the defendant, on the grouod fisCpy,
will wai obtained by the said Mary Danes, obehl):tdo
tamed an undue controul over the decemea, 11(wbe 51)
thereby depriving the rightful person, Mr. E°. • „/I
rer •
Newsom. ri 11040°
Dr. PHILLIMORE, on the p.rt of Mary ,J$ pi
two letters written by the deceased, proviog til'ecoof re;
entertained by the deceased to Mary Daum '11:14"„ tet'eiere
that the Court should not allow the allegat'°'
ceived after so long a time had elapsed since the llet ot
adm
Dinistration were ranted.
Donsom followged on• the same side, and
the contents of this allegation should have j 0 10
before. jet've
Join
Sir Jo Nicnot, after a few observatito,9l. ti) ibee
suspend the proceedings in the cause, in oidtr telootl
tion might he considered, and that if the
thinks proper, to admit it.
The Court afterwards adjourned.

COURT OF EXCHEQUI';I/*
re'
V. sriEns AN la
th'
X1313%ei0, t...
Mr. PARKER applied for a special ig.i° 0 1 'eve;oi
strain the dekmlants proceeding in an gel 0 to loge d
had commenced against the plaintiff, an 7'0‘13,3:1,111",,
them negociating or parting with a bill Qtiott
2701. 10s. It appeared from the affidavits, iopsto e,
tiff in the'year 1828, commenced basin ?s ?sett; LI
with Kirby, as a fishmonger, for which b:.d. eac an
sideration three bills of exchange of 2 /71.00011eolaitill
the last became due the partnership vi'sg .$OO r
was agreed that the bill shomld be si"n

!e affidavits then stated, that the aefendant Spier: took
bill with nit an indorsement, and after he had receive 1.
t!ce of the agreement to give it tip to the plaintiff. The
waif was willing to submit to auy terms the Court
ight impose in granting the injunction, so as to bring
e matter in dispute to an adjustment, without incurring
iew expenee that might be ruinous to some of the parties.
Cluass Bazox—What answer has the defendant to this
at ion

Mr. HortßE—Mr. Spiers is an attorney of this Court.
be positively denies any knowledge of the agreement
give the bill up to the plaintiff; and says that it was
ought to him in the regular way for discount, by an at-
rue,' named Levy, aad that he gave the full consideration
r it,

CHIEF BA RON—I am of opinion that answer is suffi-
ent. The motion must he dismissed, and that with costs.
Their Lordships, after hearing several other motions,
Co public interest, and postponing others until 31r.
aron Bolland takes his sell, rose et 12 o'clock.