From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.
Veale v. Warner
Court of King’s Bench
85 Eng. Rep. 463, 468 (1670)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Veale (plaintiff) filed suit against Warner (defendant), claiming that he loaned Warner £2,000 and that Warner never repaid the money. Warner challenged the suit on the grounds that an arbitrator had already awarded Veale £3,169 pounds and that Warner had already paid Veale that amount, and released him from liability. Veale denied that Warner had paid the £3,169 pounds and moved for judgment. Warner then argued that the arbitrator’s award was void and thus it did not matter whether Warner had paid the award or not even though he claimed that he had paid it. In response to this, Veale admitted to the previous arbitrator’s award.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
