Parsons against Perns
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1796 |
| Date | 01 January 1796 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 86 E.R. 757
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, CHANCERY, COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER.
[91] case 59. parsons against perns. Hilary Term, 22 & 23 Car. 2, Roll 1051. If one of two women who are joint-tenants in fee make a feoffment to a man, and livery within view, and marry the feoffee before he enters on the land, his entry after the marriage is a good execution of the livery; for being within viow an irrevocable interest passed to the feoffee, and the subsequent entry shall relate back so as to make the feoffment perfect.-S. C. Pollexfen, 45 to 53. S. C. 1 Vent. 186. S. C. 2 Lev. 34. S. C. 3 Salk. 165. S. C. 2 Keb. 872, 880. Moor, 85. 4 Co. 68. Co. Lit. 52, 351. 1 Vern. 330. 8 Mod. 68. Perk. 214. Sheph. Touch, 216, 217. Trespass. Two women were jointenants in fee. One of them made a charter of feoffment^ and delivered the deed to the feoffee, and said to him, being within view of the land, " Go, enter, and take possession;" but before any actual entry by the feoffee, the feoffor and feoffee intermarry. The question was, whether or no this marriage, coming between the delivery of the deed and the feoffee's entry, had destroyed the operation of the livery within the view? Pollexfen. It hath not; for the power and authority that the feoffee hath to enter, is coupled with an interest, and not countermandable in fact, and if so, not in law. If I grant one of my horses in my stable, nothing passeth till election, and yet the grant is not revocable: so till attornment nothing passeth, and yet the deed is not revocable. If the woman in our case had married a stranger, that would not have been a revocation : Perk. 29. I shall compare it to the case of Burgaine v. Spurting, Cro. Car. 273, 284 (a). Now for the interest gotten by the husband by the marriage; he hath no estate in his own right. If a man be seised in the right of his wife, and the wife be attainted of felony, the lord shall enter and oust the husband ; he gains nothing but a bare perception of profits till issue had: after issue had, he has an estate for life. Where a man that hath...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wilkinson against Rocklas
...but that it is only necessary in the case of lecturers. See also Campbel v. Aldrich, 2 Wils. 79. Rex v. Bishop of Chester, 1 Term Rep. 404. 1MOD.91. HILARY TERM, 23 AND 24 CAR. 2. IN B. R. 757 information, in the nature of trover and conversion, against him that hath the goods of the party ......