Veale v. Warner
Court of King’s Bench
85 Eng. Rep. 463, 468 (1670)
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
Holding and Reasoning
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 166,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 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.