Taylor v. Jones, 166 Temple v. Pullen, 49 Terry v. Parker, 150 Thackray v. Blackett, 165, 168, 234 Thicknesse v. Bromilow, 69, 187 Thomson v. Simpson, 298 Thornton v. Maynard, 123, 205 Thorpe v. Coombe, 291 Tondeur, Ex parte, 137, 182 Tootel, Ex parte, 31 Torrance v. Bank of British North America, 219, 224, 296 Towne v. Rice, 265 Treacher v. Hinton, 178 Treuttel v. Barandon, 113, 114 v. Samson, 150, 168 v. Stones, 170, 195 Turquand, Ex parte, 282 Twibell v. London Suburban v. Morrison, 194 v. National Bank of New Zealand, 222 Waring, Ex parte, 300 Warren v. Haigh, 117 Warrington v. Early, 26, 216 Warriner v. Rogers, 129 Warwick v. Nairn, 98 v. Rogers, 200, 213 Watervliet Bank v. White, 109 v. Maule, 104 v. Wake, 311 Watson v. Evans, 21, 108 - v. Russell, 55, 83, 89, 95, 98 v. Tarpley, 140 Watts v. Jefferyes, 127 Way v. Bassett, 291 V. Herne Bay Commis- Webber v. Maddocks, 214 TABLE OF CASES OVERRULED, DOUBTED, OR EXPLAINED. Agra and Masterman's Bank, Re (1867), L. R. 2 Ch. 391, distinguished Re Barned's Banking Co., Ex parte Stephens (1868), L. R. 3 Ch. 753, at 756. Allen v. Edmundson (1848), 2 Exch. 719, discussed Studdy v. Beesty (1889), 60 L. T. N. S. at 649, C. A. Allen v. Kemble (1848), 6 Moore, P. C. 314, qualified Rouquette v. Overmann (1875), L. R. 10 Q. B. at 540. Armfield v. Allport (1857), 27 L. J. Ex. 42, distinguished M'Call v. Taylor (1865), 34 L. J. C. P. 365. Arthur v. Clarkson (1865), 35 Beav. 458, disapproved Re Whitaker (1889), 42 Ch. D. 119, at 125, C. A. Austin v. Bunyard (1865), 6 B. & S. 687, discussed Gatty v. Fry (1877), 2 Ex. D. at 267. Bacon v. Searles (1788), 1 H. Bl. 88, explained Jones v. Broadhurst (1850), 9 C. B. at 185. Banbury v. Lisset (1774), 2 Stra. 1211, overruled Griffin v. Weatherby (1868), L. R. 3 Q. B. at 759. Bank of Bengal v. Fagan (1849), 5 Moore, I. A. 40, distinguished Jonmenjoy v. Watson (1884), 9 App. Cas. 561, at 568. Bank of Bengal v. Macleod (1849), 7 Moore, P. C. 35, distinguished Jonmenjoy v. Watson (1884), 9 App. Cas. 561, at 567. Banner, Ex parte, Re Tappenbeck (1876), 2 Ch. D. 278, considered Phelps v. Comber (1884), 26 Ch. D. 755. Barber v. Mackrell, W. N. (1892), p. 87, reversed by W. N. (1892), p. 133, C. A. Bartrum v. Caddy (1838), 9 A. & E. 275, distinguished Glasscock v. Balls (1889), 24 Q. B. D. 13, C. A. Beck v. Robley (1774), 1 H. Bl. 89, explained Jones v. Broadhurst (1850), 9 C. B. at 185. Bickerdike v. Bollman (1786), 1 T. R. 405, regretted Carter v. Flower (1847), 16 M. & W. at 748. Birmingham Banking Co., Ex parte (1868), L. R. 3 Ch. 651, commented on Re London and Mediterranean Bank (1871), L. R. 6 Ch. at 209. Bloxam, Ex parte (1801), 6 Ves. 449, doubted Re Gomersall (1875), 1 Ch. D. 137, see at 142, overruled Ex parte Newton (1880), 16 Ch. D. at 336, C. A. Boulcott v. Woolcott (1847), 16 M. & W. 584, explained Morris v. Walker (1850), 15 Q. B. at 599. Boulton v. Welsh (1837), 3 Bing. N. C. 688, overruled Lewis v. Gompertz (1840), 6 M. & W. at 403. Britton v. Webb (1824), 2 B. & C. 483, commented on Morris v. Walker (1850), 15 Q. B. at 599. Brown v. Davies (1789), 3 T. R. 80, overruled Ex parte Swan (1868), L. R. 6 Eq. at 358. Brown v. Philpot (1840), 2 Moo. & R. 285, questioned Smith v. Braine (1851), 16 Q. B. 244. Callaghan v. Aylett (1810), 2 Camp. 549, overruled Fenton v. Goundry (1811), 13 East, 459. Cambefort v. Chapman (1887), 19 Q. B. D. 229, overruled WeggProsser v. Evans (1895), 1 Q. B. 108, C. A. Cameron v. Smith (1819), 2 B. & Ald. 305, commented on Laing v. Stone (1828), 2 M. & Ry. at 563. Camidge v. Allenby (1827), 6 B. & C. 373, distinguished Leeds Bank v. Walker (1883), 11 Q. B. D. 84, at 88. Castrique v. Buttigieg (1855), 10 Moore, P. C. 94, explained Abrey v. Crux (1869), L. R. 5 C. P. at 42. Catton v. Simpson (1838), 8 E. & A. 136, overruled Aldous v. Cornwell (1868), L. R. 3 Q. B. at 578. Chaplin v. Levy (1854), 9 Exch. 531, commented on Sharples v. Rickard (1857), 26 L. J. Ex. 302. Charles v. Marsden (1808), 1 Taunt. 224, commented on Parr v. Jewell (1855), 16 C. B. at 712. Coles v. Bank of England (1839), 10 A. & E. 437, overruled Swan v. North British Australasian Co. (1863), 32 L. J. Ex. 273, at 277, questioned Baxendale v. Bennett (1878), 3 Q. B. D. 525, at 534. Collenridge v. Farquharson (1816), 1 Stark. 259, commented on Oulds v. Harrison (1854), 10 Exch. at 578. Columbies v. Slim (1772), 2 Chitty R. 637, explained Deuters v. Townsend (1864), 33 L. J. Q. B. at 304. Counsell v. London and Westminster Discount Co. (1887), 19 Q. B. D. 512, explained Monetary Advance Co. v. Cater (1888), 20 Q. B. D. 785. |