Sir Richard Lee and Arnolds Case
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1687 |
| Date | 01 January 1687 |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
English Reports Citation: 74 E.R. 705
King's Bench Division
Reservation of Rents upon a joynt Lease. Assigns. Condition destroyed in part good in part. Conditions divided. Grantee of parcel of the Reversion is an Assignee within 32 H. 8. of Conditions. Condition apportioned. Condition Suspended. Severance. Conditions by act in Law divided not by Act of the Party. Statute of 32 H. 8. of Conditions taken by Equity. Difference between a Reservation and a Contract. Condition suspended in part is suspended in all.
Minx. 29 ELIZ. IN THE EXCHEQUER CHAMBER. LXXX. THE QUEEN AND LORD VAUXES CASE. Bills. In the Exchequer Chamber before the Chancellor, &c. the Lord Vaux brought a writ of error upon a judgment given against him in the Court of Exchequer, and assigned for error that a bill was exhibited against him, that the Lord Vaux had taken certain goods of the Queen at Westminster in the county of Middlesex, and also had intruded into the rectory of Ethelborough in the county of Northampton ; whereas the Queen ought to have brought several bills being for several causes, arising within several counties. But it was resolved by the whole Court, that the bill of the Queen was good enough, and here is no mischief ; for if the defendant will plead not guilty, two several venire facias shall be awarded, one into Middlesex, the other into the county of Northampton. Micit. 27 ELM IN THE COMMON PLEAS. LXXXI. OWEN AND MORGANS CASE. Common Recovery. Feme not party to the Writ of Covenant not bound by a Recovery. George Owen brought a scire facias against Morgan to have execution of a fine levied 8 Eliz. by which fine the land was given to the conusee and his heirs ; the conusee rendred the same to the husband and wife, and to the heirs of the body of the husband, (note that the husband was the conusor) the remainder in fee to the now detnandant; and note that the writ of covenant was between the conusee plaintiff and the husband deforceant, without naming the wife. And afterwards the husband suffered a common recovery without naming of the wife ; the husband and wife died without issue, and now Owen, to whom the remainder was limited by the fine, brought a scire facies ; in bar of which the recovery was pleaded. It was argued by Shuttle-worth Serjeant, that the said recovery had against the husband was a good bar, and should bar the remainder ; and the wife ought not to be named in, or party to the recovery, for that nothing accrued to her by the fine, because she was not party to the writ of covenant, and to the conusans, vide 32 H. 8. [27] Fines 108. None can take by the fine but those who are named in the writ of covenant, but every stranger may take by way of remainder, vide etiam 7 E. 3. Br. Fines 114. 6 E. 3. Fitz. Fines 117. 7 E. 3. Fitz. Scire Facias 136. It is said by Herle, If such a fine ut supra be taken, it is good as long as it is in force. LXXXII. SIR RICHARD LEE AND ARNOLDS CASE. Reservation of Rents upon a joynt Lease. Assigns. Condition destroyed in part good in part. Conditions divided. Grantee of parcel of the Reversion is an Assignee within, 32 H. 8. of Conditions. Condition apportioned. Condition suspended. Severance, Conditions by act in Law divided not by Act of the Party. Statute of 32 H. 8. of Conditions taken, by Equity. Difference between a Reservation and a Contract. Condition suspended in part is suspended in all. Sir Richard Lee, Kt. seized of three manors, made a lease of them to Sir Nicholas Arnold for certain years, reserving for the one...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lessee Delap v Leonard
...V. CowperENR 1 C. M. & R. 418. Winter's caseENR 3 Dyer, 309. Rawlyns' caseENR 4 Coke 52. Britman V. Stanford Owens, 41. Lee V. ArnoldENR 4 Leon. 27. Thompson V. Home 1 Ir. Law Rep. 179. Russell V. Thynne 6 Law Rec. N. S. 269. Denny V. O'Connell L. & T. 929. Black V. Davis Batt. 99. Doe dem.......
-
Lessee of George Gubbins and of Several Others v Frederick Massy
...Moore's R. 50. Plant v. JamesENR 5 B. & Ad. 791. ArmitageENR 2 B. & C. 197, 207. Lawrence v. ShawcrossENR 3 B. & C. 752. Lee v. ArnoldENR 4 Leon, 27. Windsor v. GoverENR 2 Saund. 302-4. Doubitofte v. CurteeneENR Cro. Jac. 452. Bally v. Wells 3 Wils. 25, 32; S. C. Wilmot Notes, 341. Neale v.......
-
Doe on the joint demise of the Baron and Baroness De Rutzen against Lewis
...case (4 Eep. 120 b.), Winter's case (3 Dyer, 309 a. pi. 75), Anonymous case in G-odbolt (pi. 3, p. 3), Sir Bicltard Lee and Arnold's case (4 Leon. 27). In Knight's case (Moore, 205, 6, pi. 349), Anderson C.J. of C. P. said, if there be two coparceners of a reversion, and they make partition......
-
Lessee Orr v Stevenson
...v. HughesENR 6 Bing. 689 Wright v. FairfieldENR 2 B. & Ad.727. Whittingham's case Ante. Dumpor's caseUNK 4 Rep. 120. Lee v. ArnoldENR 4 Leon, 27. Wivel's caseENR Hob. 45. Anne Mayowe's case Ante. Fawcett v. Hall Al. & Nap. 248. Cranmer's case Cro. Eliz. 69. 2 CASES AT LAW. T. T. 1842. Earch......