Le Case de Proxies
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1792 |
| Date | 01 January 1792 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 80 E.R. 491
IN LESCHEQUER.
Les REPORTS des CASES & MATTERS en LEY, RESOLVES & ADJUDGES en les COURTS del ROY en IRELAND : Collect and digest per SIR JOHN DAVIS Chivaler, ATTURNEY-GENERALL del Roy en cest Realm. 1074. [1] tkin. 2 jacobe, in leschequer. le case de proxies. Enter le Roy & Sir Ambrose Forth, Doctor del Civile Ley, & un des Maisters del Chauncerie, le case fuit tiel. Levesque de Meth, dovant le dissolution rles monasteries, avoit un proxie cle xvs. iiij d. paiable annualmeut hors dl Goinmandrie de Kells in le countie de Meth, parcel del possessions del Hospital! de S. John de Jerusalem in Ireland; & un aut proxie d xxs. paiable annualment bors del impropriate Rectory A Trevet in mesme le countie, parcell del possessions del Abby de Thotnascourt in le countie de Dublin. Anno 33 H. 8. le dit Hospital de S. John de Jerusalem & le dit Abby de Thomas-court fueront suppreaae & dissolve, & touts los possessions des ambideux dits meaaons fuer vest in le actual & real possession del Corone per Act del Parlianii. Mes in m le Act est un expresse saving de proxies al touts evesques & lour successors. Apres ceo, 1'Evesque de Meth & son clergie, (car ce evesquerie nad deane & chapter) p fait iuroll dat 16 Martii, 3(i H. 8. graunt les proxies avantdit (enter auters) -al Roy H. 8. ses hrs & successors; le dit Roy esteant al temps del grant & puis in actual possession del dit commandry & rectory, hors de qux ibs dits proxies fueront paiable, Puia, la Roigne Eliz. per ses letters patents dat l.Novembris en 1 aim' 33. de sa reigne, demise le dit commandry & rectory al Doctor Forth, rendant rent, sans ascun reservation des proxies. Et si ore il serra charge ove les dits proxies, & les arrerages dyceux encurrues depuis le commencemt de son leas, fuit le question. Et fuit adjudge que il serroit charg'. Et 3 points fuerot move & debate en 1'argumt de cest case. 1. Si les proxies fueront tout ouaterment extinct per le suppression & dissolution des dits religious measons de S. John de Jerusalem & de Thomascourt, niet obatant le dit saving deins 1'act de dissolution. 2. Si 1'Evesque puissoit granter les proxies al Roy. 3. Si les proxies fueront extinct eu maines del Roy per le unitie de possession. 1. Pur le primer point, fuit object per le counsel del Sir Ambrose Forth, que les proxies fueront extinct per le suppression Ss dissolution de les religious measons: pur ceo que le visitation de les religious measons fuit la sole cause de paymt des proxies ; et cessante causa cessat effectus. Car les religious persons esteaunt deraigne & disperse, ne fueront apres ceo subject al visitation, & donqs, quant la visitation cease, le proxie, esteant solemt un exhibition done al visitor par ses travailing charges, cessera auxi. Car procuratio (come les canonists de fine ceo) est exhibitio sumptuum necessariorum facta prtelatis, qui diosceses peragrando ecclesias subjectas visitant. Uncore ils agreeont, que le visitation ne cessa immediatement per le surrender, ou per 1'Act of Parliarnt que done les religious measoas & lour possessios al Corone; car 492 LE CASE DE PROXIES DAVIS. 2. p cao lour corporations ne fueront dissolve: come est terms en le case d Dearie & Chapiter de Norwich en le 3, part des Reports de le Seignior Coke, 15 Ass. p. 8. 32 H. 8. Br. Corporations 78. Mes quant les religious persons fueront deraigne, & avoent relinquish lour habit, rule & order, pur queux ils fueront visitable, adonques le corporation fuit oustermerit dissolve, & sur ceo le visitation cessa. Et ils resemblont le proxie due pur visitation al atmuitie pro eonsilr'o, ou pro servitio impendendo: ai le counsell ou le service soit withdraw, le arrnuitie est deterrain. Issinfc si rent charge soit graunt pur un chimin, stoop le chimin, & le rent charge serra auxi stopp. 9 Ed. 4. 19. 15 Edw. 4. 2. 21 Ed. ;i. 7. 45 Ed. 3. iS. Dier 6 H. 8. 2. & 6 Ed. 6. 7G. Issint ou corodie est graunt pur certain service destre fait, omission del service determin le corodie, 20 Edw. 4. fol. ultimo. [2] Fuit auxy dit, que cast clutie ne fuit annual, mes continget. & paiable tantsolemeut sur chescun visitation; come escuage sur chescuri journey roiall, ou come aide pur file inarier, ou pur faire fits chivalcr : en queux clarreine cases, si avowrie soit fait pur le aide, est bone plea en barre de avowry, a dire, que le avowant nad tiel fits ou file en vie al temps del aide levie. F. N. Br, 82. g. Et pur le Saving, ils cliont, que ceo fuit un Flattering Saving, que ne poet preserver les proxies en esse, queux la ley ad extinguish; come est ten9 14 Eliz. Dier 313. que les tenures del Obit ou Chauntry terres tenus del subjects sont extinct per lact del 1 E. 6. nient obstant le Saving en le dit Act, propter absurditatern : issint les proxies icy serront extinct propter absurditatem. Car come est absiml que le Roy serra subject al attendance en respect de tenure ; issint est absurd que le Roy serra subject al visitation, ou al ascun dutie en respect de ceo. De mesme le nature sont plusors Savings raise en Waldnyhams case, Plo. Com' 563. queux sont la appell Flattering Savings. Pur le second point, fuit object, que le Evesque ne puissoit graunter les proxies al Roy pur 2 reasons; lun deduce del...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Garland v Carlisle
...I cannot see ; the evidence in the one case would be materially different from, the evidence in the other. [42] The next case is Cole v. Davis (1 Ld. Raym. 724), which at best is but a Nisi Prius case. Its authority is materially detracted from by the observation of Lord Mansfield in Cooper......
-
Wilbraham v Snow
...13 East, 522, Wallace v. Breeds. 2 M. & S. 397, Busk v. Davis. 5 Taunt. 176, White v. Wilks. 1 Marsh. 2, S. C. 5 Taunt. 617, Shepley v. Davis. 1 Marsh. 252, S. C. 4 Camp. 237, Withers v. Lys. 1 Holt, 18, S. C. 6 East, 614, Hanson v. Meyer. 2 Camp. 240, Zagury v. Furnell. 11 East, 210, Rugg ......
-
Cabell v Vaughan
...pleaded as to parcel of the sum demanded in an action, required the formal commencement and conclusion. In the subsequent case of Ration v. Davis, 1 y. B. 496. 1 G-. & D. 21, S. C., the Court of Q. B. adhered to their decision in Weeding v. Aldrich; which certainly appears to be more in acc......
-
Davis v Duke of Marlborough
...defendant the Duke to the defendant Eden (by the plaintiff's appointment), of the capital messuage called Blenheim House, 2 WILS. OH. 136. DAVIS 1 . MARLBOROUGH (DUKE OF) 261 and all the manors and hereditaments comprised in the letters patent of the 5th of May, 4 Anne ; To hold to Eden, hi......
-
Unbridled Prosecutorial Discretion and Standardless Death Penalty Policies: the Unconstitutionality of the Washington Capital Punishment Statutory Scheme
...was no denial of equal protection. Id. at 319-20, 616 P.2d at 1236 (emphasis added). 205. 405 U.S. 156, 162 (1972). 206. Id. at 170. 207. K. Davis, 1 Administrative Law Treatise, § 3.9, at 180 208. 93 Wash. 2d 728, 612 P.2d 792 (1980). 209. Id. at 732, 612 P.2d at 794 (citation omitted)(emp......
-
Administering the National Environmental Policy Act
...at hand.”). Years later, Kenneth Davis would call the APA’s deinitions “new obstacles” to the precise identiication of rules. Kenneth Culp Davis, 1 Administrative Law Treatise §5.01 (1958). 74. See John F. Manning, Constitutional Structure and Judicial Deference to Agency Interpretations of......
-
A new 'sliding scale of deference' approach to abuse of discretion: appellate review of district court departures under the federal sentencing guidelines.
...(53.) 18 U.S.C. [sections] 3553(c)(2) (1994). (54.) 18 U.S.C. [sections] 3742(a)-(b) (1994). (55.) Steven Alan Childress & Martha S. Davis, 1 Federal Standards of Review [sections] 1.01, at 1-3 (1992) ("At its clearest level, a standard of review prescribes the degree of deference given......
-
American Empire Surplus Lines v. Hathaway Dev. Co.: an Important Occurrence in Georgia Insurance Law
...525 F. Supp. 2d 1344, 1349 (M.D. Ga. 2007) (finding the reasoning of James and Chadd's Lake unpersuasive). [31] Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Davis, 153 Ga. App. 291, 294, 265 S.E.2d 102, 105 (1980). Accord York Ins. Co. v. Williams Seafood of Albany, Inc., 273 Ga. 710, 712, 544 S.E.2d 156, 157 (2......
-
DC Register Vol 70, No 35 September 1, 2023 Pages 011603 to 011961
...Unit Division of Systems and Supports, K-12 1050 First Street NE, Fifth Floor, Washington, DC 20002 Phone: (202) 741-5095 Email: Delia.Davis1@dc.gov The RFA will be available on the District of Columbia Office of Partnerships and Grant Services website and https://osse.dc.gov/service/commun......
-
40 C.F.R. § 282.95 Vermont State-Administered Program
...by reference in this paragraph from Ted Unkles, UST Program Manager, Vermont Department of Environment Conservation, 1 National Life Drive; Davis 1 Montpelier VT 05620-3704; Phone number: ted.unkles@vermont.gov; Hours: Monday to Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.; link to statutes and regulatio......
-
N.J. Admin. Code § 13:20-34.2 Registration Numbers Reserved
...QQ 99999 for "historic" vehicles registered pursuant to 39undefined39:3-27.3 et seq.; Q1 through Q9999 for "historic" motorcycles; 10. DAV 1 through DAV 999, 1 DAV through 999 DAV, DV 1 through DV 9999 and 1 DV through 9999 DV for vehicles owned by members of "Disabled American Veterans" of......
-
DC Register Vol 70, No 32 August 11, 2023 Pages 010929 to 011130
...Unit Division of Systems and Supports, K-12 1050 First Street NE, Fifth Floor, Washington, DC 20002 Phone: (202) 741-5095 Email: Delia.Davis1@dc.gov The RFA will be available on the District of Columbia Office of Partnerships and Grant Services website and https://osse.dc.gov/service/commun......