English Legal History and its Materials

View   r4  >  r3  ...
SouthcotesCase 4 - 02 Dec 2008 - Main.LuisVilla
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="PaperTopics"

Southcote's Case

Line: 23 to 23
 "The reason of the judgment," says Lord Coke, "was, because the plaintiff had delivered the goods to be safely kept, and the defendant had taken the charge of them upon himself, by accepting them on such a delivery." Had the reporter stopped here, I do not see what possible objection could have been made; but his exuberant erudition boiled over, and produced the frothy conceit which has occasioned so many reflections on the case itself; namely, "that to keep and to keep safely are one and the same thing;" [...]

Coggs v. Bernard, besides overturning, has an extensive set of rebutting citations to show that this was 'never' the rule before this case.

Added:
>
>
  • tmpljeH0b.odt: (Not actually the right file; testing upload from Sugar/OLPC)

Revision 4r4 - 02 Dec 2008 - 20:54:59 - LuisVilla
Revision 3r3 - 11 Nov 2008 - 04:56:54 - LuisVilla
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM