Anthony Parker, - Appellant; Humphry Burroughs and George Reynolds, - Respondents
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1702 |
| Date | 01 January 1702 |
| Court | House of Lords |
English Reports Citation: 1 E.R. 275
House of Lords
Mew's Dig. i. 587.
[257] case 52.-anthony paekek,-Appellant; humphry burroughs and g-eorge eeynolds,-Respondents [1702]. [Mew's Dig. i. 587.] The appellant stated, that by articles of marriage between appellant and his late wife, 22d June, 1688, it was agreed that her estate (except some leasehold interests in houses) should be at her own disposal by deed or will, notwithstanding the coverture; and that appellant being a member of the church of England, and his wife, and her trustees, Anabaptists, differences arose, occasioned, as he conceived, by some Anabaptists, and particularly respondent Burroughs; but that afterwards, by mediation of friends, they came to a second agreement, 3d July, 1691, to live and cohabit together or separately at their pleasures, and that she might dispose of her estate as she thought fit; and that in her last illness, a spotted fever, when she was non compos mentis, a will was pretended to be made by her, 6th October, 1699, whereby after a, legacy of 100?. to William Taylor, her sister's son and next of kin, and other small legacies, she gave the rest of her estate to respondents, and named them executors, who were no wise related to her: And that respondents, upon her death, under colour of that will, possessed themselves of her estate when appellant was in the country, (and had no notice of her death) and privately proved the will in common form in the Consistory of London, of which, as soon as appellant had notice, he questioned the validity of the will; and after examination of several witnesses, Dr. Newtan, the proper judge, upon a full hearing, pronounced sentence against the will, and granted administration to appellant: And that respondents appealed from that sentence, and afterwards proposed a reference, and artfully persuaded appellant to name Dr. Titus Oates for a referee, who was teacher of the congregation whereof respondent Burroughs was elder or deacon; and bonds of 4000?. penalty were executed next day, con- 275 COLLES. PARKER V. BURROUGHS [1702] ditioned to perform the award: And that Dr. Gates, after several days hearing the parties and their witnesses, on the 26th of December, 1700, made his award, and confirmed the sentence against th£ pretended will, and awarded [258] appellant the leasehold estate, and 1500?. in lieu of the residue of his wife's estate, and mutual releases to be executed: And that respondents exhibited their bill in Chancery, to- set aside the award, which appellant and Dr. Oats answered ; and witnesses were examined on both sides, and the cause heard 17th November, 1702, before the Lord Keeper; who decreed that the award should be set aside, as unfairly made and obtained; but appellant insisted that respondents had not shewn any...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Eckhart v A.G.
...towards one of the parties but it is hardly ever the case that actual bias is disclosed though in the case of Parker v Burroughs 1702 Colles p 257 that is what did happen. In that case the infamous Dr Titus Oates in order to take revenge upon a particular family for having failed to invite ......