Broughton v Langley
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1790 |
| Date | 01 January 1790 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 92 E.R. 84
COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS
broughton vers. langley. Intr. Trin. 12 W. 3, B. R. Rot. 414. S. C. Lutw. 823. Salk. 679. Holt 708. 1 Eq. Abr. Trust and Trustees, C. pi. 3, 4th ed. p. 383. Pleadings and verdict, Lutw. 814, post, vol. 3, p. 152. Under a limitation to two and their heirs in trust to permit J. S. to take the rents, issues and profits of the estate, the use is executed in J. S. Under a devise of the rents issues and profits of an estate to a feme covert for life to be paid by the executors of the devisor, so as the husbands should tiot intermeddle with them. Q. whether the legal estate vests in the feme, or the executors. The plaintiff Humphry Broughton brought an ejectment against the defendant Abraham Langley upon a demise of three messuages, twenty acres of land, &c. lying at Hipperholme cum Brigghouse in the parish of Halifax in the county of York, made to the plaintiff for five years, to be computed from the first of March 12 W. 3, &c. by John Ramsden Junior. Upon not guilty pleaded, and a trial had before Turton Justice at the Summer Assises held at York 12 W. 3, a special verdict was found, viz. that before the time of the trespass and ejectment Robert Ramsden grandfather of the said John Ramsden lessor of the plaintiff was seised of the, &c. in fee; and being so seised, the sixth of April 1689 he made his testament, and thereby devised the messuages, &c. in question with their appurtenances, in his verbis, viz. I do hereby give, devise, and bequeath unto John Stancliffe, and Robert Ramsden my second son, and their heirs and assigns, all those ray messuages or tenements with the appurtenances at Norwood-Green, and all the houses, buildings, closes, lands and grounds to the same belonging, now in the tenure of Jeremy Robinson and Robert Wilson, or their assigns; and I do hereby express, publish and declare, that the said John Stancliffe and Robert Ramsden my son and their heirs shall by force of this my last will and testament stand and be seised of the said messuages, &c. to all the uses, intents and purposes herein after mentioned ; that is to say, first of intent and purpose, that they shall permit and suffer George Ramsden my son to have, receive [874] and take the rents, issues and profits of the said messuages, &c. for and during the term of his natural life, and after his decease shall stand seised thereof to the use of the heira of the body of the said George my son lawfully begotten and to be begotten, and for default of such issue to the use of the said John Ramsden and Robert Ramsden my sons, and of their heirs and assigns for ever, equally to be 2LD.HATM.878. EASTER TERM, 2 ANN^E REGIN^ 85 divided amongst them; provided always and upon condition that if it shall fortune the said George my son to marry a woman that shall have bona fide one or more hundred pounds, that then the said John Stancliffe and Robert Ramsden my son and the said George shall have power by virtue of this my will to make a jointure to and for such wife of 101. per annum out of the same lands, &c. for every hundred pounds such wife shall have for her portion for the life of such wife, and after to the heirs of the body of the said George upon such wife, &c. then the jury find further, that the said Robert Ramsden the grandfather by his said testament devised other tenements at Norwood-Green in Hipperholme aforesaid to his said son Robert Ramsden in fee, in the occupation of Richard Riddlestone, upon condition that the said Robert Ramsden should permit and suffer George Ramsden and his heirs peaceably to enjoy and occupy a close of land called Paradise, and to take the rents, issues and profits thereof to his own use ; and in default thereof, that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Patrick Brennan, Petitioner, and Harman Fitzmaurice, Respondent; and of The Act of The 5 7Amp; 6 W. 4, C. 55. v
...Cont. Rem. 104. (g) 2 P. Wms. 245. (a) 3 Bro. P. C. 180. (b) 7 T. R. 531. (c) 2 Vern. 670. (d) 2 P. Wms. 471. (e) 2 Strange, 1125. (f) 2 Lord Raym. 873. * As to the general rule of construction applicable to a devise, see his Honor's judgment in Ormonde v. Wandesforde, ante. vol. 1, p. 254,......