73 ER 442
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1794 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
| Year | 1794 |
English Reports Citation: 73 E.R. 442
King's Bench Division
[200 b] martin against harrison. Where two hundredors only appear on the first panel, the tales for default of hundredors need only consist of two others, which shall be added to eight of the principal jurors not objected to. Hast, jurora, n. (61) Note, Upon the postea between Martin and Harrison it i)y'y65'b,338b. appeared that at nisi priiis a full jury appeared, of which there were only two hundredors who were sworn upon the principal, and the rest all are out of the hundred ; upon which, and for default of the residue of the jury, the plaintiff prayed a tales of two hundredors de circMJiistantibus, according to the statute [35. H. 8. c. 6.]; and the sheriff returned there only two hundredors, who were annexed to the first panel, and sworn upon the principal also; so that having now four hundredors, resort was made to the jurors who were of the first panel out of the hundred, and eight of them were sworn seriatim. And they found the issue for the plaintiff. And this matter was alleged in arrest of judgment, s. that the trial should have been by ten de, drcwmstanf and the two jurors who were first sworn, without having made any resort as above. Sed non alloaatur ; because those out of the hundred were never discharged clearly, but locto 101 "' ^n a" P'nts allowed for sufficient, and indifferent to pass, only for Dy. 245 a. Be"1-33- 7. Jac. In Cur' Wardorum. Samin's case [Ley. 11. 13. Co. 54.] by the two Chief Justices and the Chief Baron, that in this case if a feoffment be made to a husband to the use of the husband and wife, they are joint-tenants, and no ward. Hil. 43. El. C. B. between £ Reading and Norris in ejedione firnue upon a feoffment to a daughter and two others to the use of the daughter and the heirs of her body, adjudged that the daughter here had a fee. And Serjeant Harris vouched such case to be a fee-tail for the whole, but it was afterwards reversed for this in B. R. and adjudged a fee, and here the daughter and others adjudged tenants in common, for the feoffee to the use of himself took by livery, and not by the limitation of the use. And this case being reported at the Reading in Lincoln's Inn, Lent 1632, Harrison, lecturer, took a difference between this and Samin's case before cited, for there all the fee passed to the same parties, and therefore they are joint-tenants; it is otherwise here, for...
To continue reading
Request your trial