Hopewell v Ackland
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1795 |
| Date | 01 January 1795 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 91 E.R. 212
COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, CHANCERY, COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER.
Hill. 8 Ann. C. B. Comyns 164, S. C.
Approved but not applied, Doe d. Bunny v. Rout, 1816, 7 Taunt. 80; 2 Marsh, 400. Referred to, Pocock v. Bishop of Lincoln, 1821, 3 Br. & B. 37; 6 Moore, 177. Distinguished, Monk v. Mawdsley, 1827, 1 Sim. 290; Johnson v. Bradly, 1847, 11 Ir. Eq. R. 389.
[239] 18. hops well versus ackland. [Hill. 8 Ann. C. B. Comyns 164, S. C.] [Approved but not applied, Doe A. Bunny v. Rout, 1816, 7 Taunt. 80; 2 Marsh, 400. .Referred to, Pocock v. Bishop of Lincoln, 1821, 3 Br. & B. 37 ; 6 Moore, 177. Distinguished, Monk v. Mawdsley, 1827, 1 Sim. 290; Johnson v. Bradly, 1847, 11 Ir. Eq. R. 389.] Whatever else I have not before disposed of will carry a fee in a will. 2 Vent. 285. Mod. Cases, &c. 223. 3 D. 201, p. 7, S. C. 1 Wilson 333. Cornyns 337, 8, 9. Mod. Ca. 108. In ejectment a special verdict was found, viz. John Ackland, boing seised in fee of the lands in question, devised an annuity to H. in fee. Item, I devise my manor of Bucknall to A. and his heirs. Item, I devise all my lands, tenements, and hereditaments to the said A. Item, I devise all my goods and chattels, money and debts, and whatever else I have not before disposed of, to the said A. he paying my debts and legacies ; and makes him executor. And now the question being, what estate A. had in the lands, tenements, and hereditaments? it was urged that the item conjoined the sentences, and carried on the testator's intent, and imported a meaning to give the like estate, as was before expressed in the precedent sentence, like Moor 52. Also the word hereditament imports an inheritance. Vide 2 Lev. 169. The Statute 12 Car. 2, gave the Crown the lands, tenements, and hereditaments of the regicides; and it was held that the inheritance in tail of one of them passed by those words. Et per Trevor, G.J. Item is an usual word in a will to introduce new distinct matter: therefore a clause thus introduced is not influenced by, nor to influence a precedent or subsequent sentence, unless it be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Murray v Champernowne
... ... See, amongst other cases, Hughes v. Pritchard (1); Hopewell v. Ackland (2); Scott v. Alberry (3); Day v. Daveron (4); and I shall declare and decree that Philip Charles Knightley Wolfe Murray is at liberty to ... ...