1787-11-13 (static/transcriptions/1787/11/300.jpg)

Temple versus Killingworth. 1. Shower
254
Action sue le Case agst for levying a plaint in the Sheriffs Court London, and causing the Plff to be arrested thereon, ubi revera, the cause of Action arose not within the Jurisdn, & non cul’ pleaded & Verdict pro Quer’, and 5# damages assessed, & moved in arrest of Judgt, that the Act: lies not, for that there was no malice in the Case, & twas not averred, that he was held to unreasonable Bail, but barely because it [ILL], extra jurisdiction; and there was cited 1 Roll Abr: 102. That an Action would lye for a second arrest for the same cause after a Remover of the first Plaint by an h/abeas Corpus, but here is no unjust [Naration?], for he might have pleaded to the Jurisdiction there, & have had his costs, and in 3 Cro. 136 Pray & Partridge’s Case, held no action lies for Suit, where there’s no cause of Action, and tis hard that an Action should lie because out of the Jurisdiction, when it will not lie, tho’ a Verdict before the Defendant, and no cause of Action at all.
Waterhouse vs. Bawde, 2 Cro. 133. No action lies for Suit in Spiritual Court for Tithes of Wood, where the Statute says no Tithes shall be paid. Argued e contra by
Mr.