Keite v Clopton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1823 |
| Date | 01 January 1823 |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
English Reports Citation: 124 E.R. 799
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
[18] terming hillarij, 16 car. 2, in com. ban. keite versus clopton. Ejectment. Ejectment for lands in Clopton brought by Keite upon a lease made by William Lucas. Resolution of the Court delivered by Bridgemau Chief Justice, who thus put the caae upon record. Thomas Clopton seised in fee of the lands in question, June 14 Car. 1, acknowledges, a statute staple of 20001. to Andrews and Hands. Trin. 16 Car. 1, there was a judgment obtained against the said Thomas Clopton in this Court of 2001. debt and damages at the suit of William Lucas. Thomas Clopton dies, John Clopton being hia son and heir, the eonisees sue an extent upon the statute, and in the writ (upon which depends this caae, it being only a single point that we are arguing) there are these words, nisi alicui haredi infra setatem existenti jure hfereditario descenderin; upon this writ the lands are extended, and upon that a liberate, this was in August 1651. Anno Domini 1657. Lucas lessor of the plaintiff upon his judgment which he had obtained against Thomas Clopton takes out a scire facias against the tertenants, and afterwards took out elegit against these lands of Clopton. This John Clopton when the extent upon the statute was taken out, was under age; when the judgment and elfigit was, be was of full age. John Clopton by command of the conisees of the statute enters upon the lessee of him that had the judgment; it appears John Clopton cemented to the extent upon the statute; he bad no title of his own to enter upon Lucas, but it was in their right. Upon this caie thus stated, this is the question. Wtnther thii extent upon the statute being made upon the land by the conisees during John's minority, the writ being nisi alicui hseredi infra setatem existenti jure bseceoftario descenderint, whether it be totally void, not only against the heir though he did consent, bub against all others; for if it were totally void, then Lucas his judgment though after the extent, was good, as so it is for the plaintiff which claims under Lucas; but if voidable and may be made good, then it is for the defendant. For I did think though it was void against the heir, yet it was not so absolutely void, but that the heir might make it good ; and not without reason. [191 It cannot be denied, but that this extent upon the statute during the minority of the heir is void priraa facie; void in some degree and not only voidable. In the cue...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Loring v Thomas
...violence to the language of the will in assigning a share to the father or mother when they would never have taken any. In Coulthurst v. Carter (18 Beav. 421), where the gift was to the children of A. A. (deceased) then living, and the issue then living of any child of A. A. dying in the li......
-
Carey v Cuthbert
...; Grant v. Grant (14) ; Bennett v. Marshall (15) : on the question of laehes : Bright v. Legerton (16,; Harcourt v. White (17); Coope v. Carter (18); Chalmer v. BradÂÂÂley (19) : on the Statute of Limitations : Sibbering v. Earl of Balcarras (20); Attorney-General v. The Fishmongers' C......
-
Clare v. Ostolosky et al., (2001) 300 A.R. 341 (QB)
...it was not on the tube on July 19, 1993? A. It was not on the tube on July 19th. Q. July 18th. A. July 18th." Page 175 - 1. 2-6 "Q. Ms. Carter: 18, 1993 you were not looking for re-anastomosis of either tube? A. No. The Court: What's that term? A. Re-anastomosis." Page 177 - 1. 16-27 "Q. No......
-
Body Corporate 205055 & ORS v Prodesigners Architects Limited &
...Ltd at [70]-[77]. rejected17 any such duty to owners of commercial buildings, having regard to the reasoning in Attorney-General v Carter18 in respect of owners of commercial buildings. Further, a duty based on health and safety concerns was pleaded by the owner of a commercial property and......
-
The Geek in Review Ep. 157 – ALM’s Bill Carter – It’s All About the Data
...out there for corporate counsel to sort of look into the firm’s a little bit more, there’s not a whole lot the other way around. Bill Carter 18:08 Yeah, no, that’s exactly right. And so we have, we started, this is something new a membership program called global leaders in law, and it is f......
-
Recent developments in individual taxation.
...is a mandatory requirement, and no deduction will be allowed if the CWA does not include such a statement." Conservation easement: In Carter, (18) the taxpayers were denied a charitable deduction related to the conveyance by a partnership in which they were partners of an easement that was ......
-
E-Procurement: Myth or Reality
...and Very dissatisfied Satisfied and Very satisfied Feature not Used # of Responses Requisitioning (incl. catalog services / shopping cart) 18% 69% 13% 174 Online supplier registration 13% 51% 36% 166 eSourcing 10% 28% 61% 163 234 MCCUE & ROMAN TABLE 3 (Continued) Features Dissatisfied and V......
-
Utah State Bulletin Number 2013-11, June 1, 2013
...- family (any day) - $900.00 j. Promotional pass - annual youth pass - $150.00 k. Companion fee - walking, non -player - $4.00 l. Motorized cart (18 holes) - $10.00 m. Motorized cart (9 holes ) - $5.00 n. Pull carts (9 holes) - $2.00 o. Club rental (9 holes) - $5.00 p. School teams - No fee......