Castle against Dod
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1791 |
| Date | 01 January 1791 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 79 E.R. 175
King's Bench Division
case 32. castle against dod. A. being tenant for life, levies a fine to the use of himself and B. for life, and if B. die, living A. to the use of C. The estate on the death of B. in the life-time of A. shall go to C. aa an occupant.-Post. 554. 1 Roll. Ab. 854. 2 Eoll. Ab. 781. Vaugh. 188. 1 Sid. 347. 3 Leon. 36. Carter 61. Co. Lit. 41. 3 Peere Wms. 262. 2 Bac, Abr. 279. Cruise on Finos, 285. Upon a special verdict the case was, that A. tenant for life, granted by fine his estate to B. and by indenture limited the use to B. for the life of A. and B.; and if he died, living A. that it should remain to C. Afterward, B. died, living A. C. entered, and let to D. for years, and died, living A. [201] Whether the lessee should retain this as an occupant, living A. or that A. should have it again (because no other use is limited after the death of C. by reason of his ancient use) ] was the question. It was adjudged, after argument, that C. should have it as an occupant, and his lessee should hold it as an occupant (a), and that A. had not any residue of the use in him: for although, where tenant in fee makes a deed of feoffment, and limits the (a) By 29 Car. 2. c. 3. where there is no special occupant in whom the estate may vest, the tenant per auter vie may devise it by will, or it shall go to the executors, and be assets in their hands for payment of debts; and by 14 G-eo. 2. c. 20. shall not only vest in the executors, but, in case the tenant dies intestate, in the administrators also, and shall go, in a cause of administration, like a chattel interest. 2 Bl. Com. 259, 260. 176 HILARY TERM, 5 JAC. 1. IN B. R. CBO.JAC.202. use for life or in tail, and doth not apeak of the residue, it shall be to the feoffor, or eonusor, because he had the ancient use in him in fee; yet when tenant for life, or he who...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brenan v Boyne
...and BOYNE. Ch. Appeal. Keegan v. Mowlds 8 Ir. Jur., N. S. 172. Castle v. DoddENR Cro. Jac. 200. M'Clintock v. Irvine 10 Ir. Chan. Rep. Williams v. JekylENR 2 Ves. sen. 681. Crozier v. Crozier 13 Dru. & War. 373. Doe v. Robinson 8 B. & Cr. 296. Lamphier v. Drapes 14 Ir. Chan. Rep. 33. Bayley......