Henry Brockholst Livingston

Name: Hughes v. Blake — Opinion of the Court
Author: Henry Brockholst Livingston

Summary

“Hughes v. Blake — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by Henry Brockholst Livingston. It explores elements such as plea, Gibson and Blake.

Quotes from Hughes v. Blake — Opinion of the Court (Henry Brockholst Livingston)

Henry Brockholst Livingston, Hughes v. Blake — Opinion of the Court

“ Whatever objection there may be to adhering strictly to this course of proceeding in every description of cases, it is considered as the long and established practice of a Court of equity, which ought not lightly to be departed from. It is not perceived, that any serious mischief can arise from it. Counsel will generally be able to decide on the merits of any defence which may be spread on a plea, and if insufficient, it is not probable they will do otherwise than set it down for argument. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Henry Brockholst Livingston, Hughes v. Blake — Opinion of the Court

“ If the rule of Courts of equity in England is to be applied, there can be no doubt. If a plea, in the apprehension of the complainant, be good in matter, but not true in fact, he may reply to it, as has been done here, and proceed to examine witnesses in the same way as in case of a replication to an answer: but such a proceeding is always an admission of the sufficiency of the plea itself, as much so, as if it had been set down for argument and allowed; and if the facts relied on by the plea are proved, a dismission of the bill on the hearing is a matter of course. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Henry Brockholst Livingston, Hughes v. Blake — Opinion of the Court

“ Here the cause of action is equally within the jurisdiction of a Court of law, which has pronounced upon it, and whose judgment must, therefore, be conclusive in all other Courts: and the argument against its conclusiveness, in this case, goes on the supposition, that the defendant cannot set up the judgment without undertaking to prove, that it was a correct judgment on the merits, or, in other words, without going through the whole process of trial again. The plaintiff had to choose between three different courses. He might sue in equity ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Henry Brockholst Livingston, Hughes v. Blake — Opinion of the Court

“ The plea consists of two material parts; it alleges a judgment at law, for the same cause of action, in a Court of competent jurisdiction; and it avers that there is no ground to impeach that judgment, and no new evidence discovered to enable the plaintiff to go behind it. There is the same strictness of pleading in equity, as at law (2 Atk. 632) ; but if the rule were not so, this plea is sufficient. The general principle is clear, that a judgment in a competent Court, is a bar to a proceeding for the same cause of action in any other Court. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Henry Brockholst Livingston, Hughes v. Blake — Opinion of the Court

“ Nor does it make any difference, that the case is proper, in itself, for equity jurisdiction. If so, a judgment at law could never be pleaded in bar of a suit in equity. Questions of fraud and trust are not the peculiar and exclusive subjects of equity jurisdiction. Whenever Courts of common law can reach these subjects, they dispose of them effectually and conclusively. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Henry Brockholst Livingston, Hughes v. Blake — Opinion of the Court

“ The Court, therefore, is entirely satisfied, that the averment in the respondent's plea, which it has just been considering, is fully established, and that the proof is such as to leave no room whatever to believe, that Blake was ever repaid the moneys he advanced as the bail of Gibson, from any other fund than that which the appellant had consented should stand pledged for that purpose. As little truth is there in the allegation, that what Williams could testify on this subject, was unknown to Hughes during the pendency of the action at law ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Henry Brockholst Livingston, Hughes v. Blake — Opinion of the Court

“ But without applying the rule which has been mentioned, to the present case, the Court has no difficulty in saying, that the matters set forth in this plea, which has been drawn with great care and judgment, constitute a complete defence to the present action, and that the appellant has failed in showing any good cause why the judgment at law should not be conclusive on all the matters stated in the bill. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Henry Brockholst Livingston, Hughes v. Blake — Opinion of the Court

“ Having come into the arrangement, Blake might well think himself at liberty, as it seems he did, to apply the other funds of Gibson in any other way which he and Gibson might think proper. Whether Gibson be liable to the appellant for the subtraction of any part of his fund for the payment of his debt, is a question not before the Court ”

Henry Brockholst Livingston

Summary

Quotes from Hughes v. Blake — Opinion of the Court (Henry Brockholst Livingston)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature