Dawes v Ferrers
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1722 |
| Date | 01 January 1722 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 24 E.R. 617
LORD CHANCELLOR MACCLESFIELD.
Keports of CASES AEGUED and DETERMINED in the HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY, and of some SPECIAL CASES ADJUDGED in the COURT OF KING'S BENCH. Collected by WILLIAM PEERE WILLIAMS, ESQ., Barrister-at-Law, published by his son, WILLIAM PEERE WILLIAMS, ESQ., Barrister-at-Law. Sixth Edition by Monro, Lowndes, and Randall, 1826. Vol. II. [1722-1734] [1] de term. pascile, 1722. Case 1.-dawes versus ferrers. [1722.] Lord Chancellor Macdesfield. ' Preced. in Chan. 589 ; 2 Eq Ca. Ab. 331, pi. 6; 8 Vin. 317, pi. 13. One seised in fee devised land to his grandaughter for life, remainder to his right heirs male for ever, and dies leaving his grandaughter his heir at law, and his deceased brother's son his next heir male ; the devise of the remainder is void. One seised in fee devises his lands to his grandaughter (being his heir at law) for her life, remainder to his own right heirs male for ever, and dies leaving his grandaughter his heir at law, and also leaving a deceased brother's son ; being the next in the male line; which nephew brought this bill against the grandaughter, to perpetuate the testimony of the will, and for the writings, and to stay waste. The defendant demurred, for that by the plaintiff's own showing, he had no title to the reversion or inheritance of the premises. Against the demurrer it was objected, that it being the declared intention of the testator, that his grandaughter his heir should have an estate for life, it was the same, as if it had been [2] said by the will, that the said heir at law should have but an estate for life ; and the remainder being limited to the right heirs male of the testator, this was a description of the next heir male, or of such person as at the testator's death should be next heir male of his name; that agreeable thereto, the case of Brown and Barkham (2 Vern. 729; Precedents in Chan. 442, 461) had been determined by Lord Cowper,(\) where the notion of Lord Coke (1 Inst. 24 b), " That he, who takes as heir male by purchase, must be completely heir, as well as heir male," was denied; and the case in 1 Vent. 372, of Pybus and Mitford was cited, as also the case there cited by Lord Hale ; where a man having three daughters, and a deceased brother's son, by his will gave 2000 to his daughters, and devised \ds land to his heir male, with a condition that the, C. iy.-3Q* 618 CONSTRUCTIONS, ETC., RELATING TO PAPISTS 2 P. WMS. 3...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Doe on the Demise of Isaac Winter against Perratt. Doeon The Several demises of Catherine Viney, Thomas Viney, and Thomas Green-Slade against Perratt. Goodtitle on The Several Demises of John Slade and John Staines Webb against Perratt
...take as heir female, for if the son were to have a daughter, she would be heir female of the body of the father. In Dawes v. Ferrars (2 P. Wms. 1. Prec. in Cb. 589), the devise was to the devisor's right heirs male for ever, his brother's son filed a bill against his grand-daughter, for the......
-
Doe on the Demise of William Angell against Benedict John Angell Angell
...Southcott v. Stowell (Freern. C. B. 216, 225), Starling v. Mrick (Free. Ch. 54), Lord Ossuhtmi's case (3 Salk. 336), Dawes v. Ferrers (2 P. Wms. 1), in 1722. Bub other cases, some much later than 1722, have established, in opposition to Coke's doctrine, that a limitation to the heirs specia......
-
Loftus v Stoney
...v. EvansENR Cited Hob. 34. Mayor, & c., of Hamilton v. HodsdenENR 3 Salk. 336. Sanderson v. DobsonENR 14 M. & W. 214. Day v. DavorenENR 2 P. Wms. 1. Acheson v. FairENR 1 Drew. 633. Winders v. WindersENR 2 T. R. 659 n. Hillas v. HillasENR 1 Cox, 362. Blackford v. LongENR 9 Sim. 447 n. Speari......
-
Thomas Wills and Ann his Wife, and Others, plaintiffs; Henry Palmer, Esq., and Others, defendants
...agreeable to common sense, nor supportable by argument. 'Tis * Precedents in Chancery, 442, 461, and 1 Stra. 35, and 2 Vernon, 729. t 2 Peere Williams, 1. Precedents in Chancery, 589. 382 QUANTOCK V. ENGLAND BURR. 2627. true, that the [2627] words " heirs male," alone, would not have been s......